BSF vs. PW (lit) NYC Forum

[Anonymous User]

Currently trying to decide where to spend next summer.

PW: Pros- seems like a safe bet with a strong litigation practice and interesting cases. Cons- Not much responsibility early on.

BSF: Pros- opportunities to do substantive work early on, greater than market bonuses. Cons - not a guaranteed offer, recent events, Boies' pending retirement.

[Anonymous User]

I would definitely go to BSF between these two, and if you discover the culture is actually toxic, you can always go to PW 3L (whereas Boies will be tough). And if you’re clerking, as most lit associates at these firms will, you’ll have another bite.

Boies leaving the firm and “recent events” are non starters; the gravitational force of the firm has already shifted to other core partners, and there is no indication in the market or general perception of associate quality that the firm has been affected (according to Americans lawyer, it had its most profitable year in 2017, and 2018 is projected to top it). The hours/work culture are a reason to choose another firm over Boies: if you want to skip by a few years unnoticed, you can do it better at a mega firm like PW than a quasi-boutique like Boies; and while Boies will force you into deposition and trial early, at PW you might be second chairing until you’re a sixth year and supporting a senior on dispositive motions your first two or three years instead of taking full responsibility for them yourself. Boies may also be less we’ll managed than older firms.

Sidenote: Since I clerked and work at another premier lit firm (W&C/MTO/ect), I realize I have a particular inflection that favors the Boies model; but I totally get wanting the other type of practice and don’t mean to disparage it. I would say that in the appellate clerkship/elite lit world, Boies is a peer of the top shops, and Paul Weiss is another NY megafirm that is considered more akin to Davis Polk/Cravath ect., albeit litigation-heavy as opposed to the transactional-heavy shops.

[Anonymous User]

BSF ... not a guaranteed offer

Is this actually true? NALP says BSF offered 18 out of 18 summers last year. Has BSF historically no-offered a significant number of summers?

[Anonymous User]

BSF ... not a guaranteed offer

Is this actually true? NALP says BSF offered 18 out of 18 summers last year. Has BSF historically no-offered a significant number of summers?

Not significant. Like 1 or 2 out of a fairly small class. PW reports an impressive 100% on a class of 130+, but the notion that none of those are cold offers is laughable.

[Anonymous User]

BSF ... not a guaranteed offer

Is this actually true? NALP says BSF offered 18 out of 18 summers last year. Has BSF historically no-offered a significant number of summers?

Not significant. Like 1 or 2 out of a fairly small class. PW reports an impressive 100% on a class of 130+, but the notion that none of those are cold offers is laughable.

Still, IMO that's a legit risk. Even assuming PW actually gives cold offers, cold offers are infinitely preferable to getting no offered. If BSF routinely no offers 1/2 out of a 15-20 person summer class, that's like 5-10%. I wouldn't be concerned if it was 1/2 out of a 100+ person summer class but 1/2 out of 15-20 is significant.

Maybe OP should split the summer?

[Anonymous User]

Take BSF and don't look back. BSF will give you far more interesting and substantive work and will likely pay you far more too (which is why they can get away with being so grade-selective). PW is giant and, while good for lit, nothing special like BSF is.

[Anonymous User]

I would definitely go to BSF between these two, and if you discover the culture is actually toxic, you can always go to PW 3L.

I wouldn’t count on it. I had a PW offer, summered somewhere else, and got no response from PW when I tried to apply 3L. I know some people who got 3L offers but they were in specific Corp groups

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, PW usually more than fills lit with their summers (though post clerkship or corporate is another story).

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, PW usually more than fills lit with their summers (though post clerkship or corporate is another story).

What do you mean by that, specifically the post clerkship part?

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, PW usually more than fills lit with their summers (though post clerkship or corporate is another story).

What do you mean by that, specifically the post clerkship part?

Not the quoted anon but he/she means that since PW prioritizes filling lit SA with 2Ls, 3Ls may not be able to get in, even if they had an offer for 2L. 3Ls have the least bargaining power in job searching while post-clerkship candidate probably have the most and will not encounter a similar difficulty (I don’t think people tend to choose mega firms like PW post-clerkship lit opportunities though)

OP - my vote is with BSF.

[Jchance]

(I don’t think people tend to choose mega firms like PW post-clerkship lit opportunities though)

OP - my vote is with BSF.

Same vote but can you expand on why as to the quoted statement within the parenthetical?

[Anonymous User]

(I don’t think people tend to choose mega firms like PW post-clerkship lit opportunities though)

OP - my vote is with BSF.

Same vote but can you expand on why as to the quoted statement within the parenthetical?

My theory is that most former clerks want to become trial/appellate lawyers so they gravitate towards smaller boutiques/firms like susman and boies where they will get early courtroom experience.

[Anonymous User]

The culture and hours will suck at both places. I would pick based on exit options. Do you want to be a private practice litigator your whole career? Pick Boies. Do you want to go government or in-house? Paul Weiss is probably the better option.

[Anonymous User]

The culture and hours will suck at both places. I would pick based on exit options. Do you want to be a private practice litigator your whole career? Pick Boies. Do you want to go government or in-house? Paul Weiss is probably the better option.

This is bad advice across like three different dimensions.

[Anonymous User]

The culture and hours will suck at both places. I would pick based on exit options. Do you want to be a private practice litigator your whole career? Pick Boies. Do you want to go government or in-house? Paul Weiss is probably the better option.

This is bad advice across like three different dimensions.

Yeah it’s just wrong... picking a firm based on exit options and not fit is a poor idea and will lead to a miserable 1-3 years. However, exit options can be useful to know. Check “Laterally” to see where people go after each firm. You can see there that PW being the better option for govt or in-house is in correct.

[Anonymous User]

The culture and hours will suck at both places. I would pick based on exit options. Do you want to be a private practice litigator your whole career? Pick Boies. Do you want to go government or in-house? Paul Weiss is probably the better option.

This is bad advice across like three different dimensions.

Yeah it’s just wrong... picking a firm based on exit options and not fit is a poor idea and will lead to a miserable 1-3 years. However, exit options can be useful to know. Check “Laterally” to see where people go after each firm. You can see there that PW being the better option for govt or in-house is in correct.

It's also just backwards. More people go between government service and private practice at Boies than at most any other firms, certainly including Paul Weiss. The NY office is filled with SDNY alums and the DC office has partners who would probably have been in Clinton administration had she won.

[Anonymous User]

what was your timeline w/ hearing back from BSF if you don't mind me asking?

[Anonymous User]

Not OP, but my offer came two days after my CB.

[Anonymous User]

I have no particular dog in this fight and would probably pick Boies.

That said, I have noticed a constant drumbeat of really pro-Boies messages on this board lately. For what it’s worth, in my view, Boies’s actual reputation falls short of what one would think based on these posts

[Anonymous User]

The culture and hours will suck at both places. I would pick based on exit options. Do you want to be a private practice litigator your whole career? Pick Boies. Do you want to go government or in-house? Paul Weiss is probably the better option.

This is bad advice across like three different dimensions.

Yeah it’s just wrong... picking a firm based on exit options and not fit is a poor idea and will lead to a miserable 1-3 years. However, exit options can be useful to know. Check “Laterally” to see where people go after each firm. You can see there that PW being the better option for govt or in-house is in correct.

It's also just backwards. More people go between government service and private practice at Boies than at most any other firms, certainly including Paul Weiss. The NY office is filled with SDNY alums and the DC office has partners who would probably have been in Clinton administration had she won.

More than probably - with certainty. There’s a good chance Dunn would have been SG or White House counsel

The argument that PW is somehow “better” for exit options that Boies in government is silly

[jbagelboy]

I have no particular dog in this fight and would probably pick Boies.

That said, I have noticed a constant drumbeat of really pro-Boies messages on this board lately. For what it’s worth, in my view, Boies’s actual reputation falls short of what one would think based on these posts

I’m responsible for a couple posts defending Boies, but it’s only in response to the false narrative being pushed likely by 0Ls that the bad press this past year has somehow permanently derailed the reputation of the firm in the legal community. As it seems others have pointed out, there are other, non-trivial reasons to avoid it if you don’t like what it offers

[Anonymous User]

If I slightly prefer NY, would it be a mistake to choose BSF NY over W&C and Gibson DC?

[Anonymous User]

If I slightly prefer NY, would it be a mistake to choose BSF NY over W&C and Gibson DC?

Yes for W&C. Gibson possibly; depends on what sort of work you can realistically expect to do there.

[Anonymous User]

If I slightly prefer NY, would it be a mistake to choose BSF NY over W&C and Gibson DC?

BSF NY is the clear choice over Gibson. W&C vs. Boies (NY) comes down to fit.

[Anonymous User]

If I slightly prefer NY, would it be a mistake to choose BSF NY over W&C and Gibson DC?

BSF NY is the clear choice over Gibson. W&C vs. Boies (NY) comes down to fit.

Agreed

If I slightly prefer NY, would it be a mistake to choose BSF NY over W&C and Gibson DC?

Yes for W&C. Gibson possibly; depends on what sort of work you can realistically expect to do there.

“Mistake” is a strong word. W&C is the more prestigious firm, but other variables matter too. If location is important (or having multiple offices, higher mid level compensation, a wider variety of litigation practices, or any other number of things Boies offers), it can justify the less objectively prestigious choice, and going to either could be reasonable