WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
rubyhenrietta

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:03 pm

WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by rubyhenrietta » Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:35 pm

I am currently a corporate associate looking to lateral and have narrowed my options down to Wilson Sonsini (SV) and Latham (SV/SF). I am hoping to eventually go in-house to a public company (not very interested in EC/VC work although I am open to working on this type of work at either firm). Would appreciate any advice/thoughts on this.

I have been talking to associates at both firms but wanted to get a view outside of that... The questions I have are:
- Exit options: which firm has the best exit options for public companies in the Bay Area? It seems like WSGR has more "cool" SV clients/more recognized name in the Bay?
- Billable hours: Requirement is slightly higher at WSGR (1950 vs. 1900) but I am wondering if that really makes a difference? A lot of people I know at non-SV/SF Latham offices do not make their bonus, but maybe that just depends on the office.
- Culture: Latham gave me a better vibe but curious if that was just about the people I happened to meet?

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:13 pm

Ex Latham associate here with friends at Wilson. My take is to go Wilson if you want to exit to a company in the bay area.

1. Exit ops are better at Wilson, full stop. It's not even close. Latham doesn't have any big pubco clients outside of broadcom and american airlines and I havent heard of anyone exiting to those companies in a long time. The exception seems to be TTG tech and IP lit at Latham, where there seems to be a strong pipeline to Facebook.
2. Billable hours requirements don't matter. You will work a shitload at LW, as much or more than at Wilson.
3. Culture is hit or miss at Wilson. The caveat is Wilson SV is big enough that you could find someone that you enjoy working with. If you don't like working with the 2 or 3 rainmakers at latham SV, you are SOL (a lot of people around Latham don't like working with a these rainmakers).

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:51 am

Based on your questions, probably WSGR. A lot of people think, for better or worse, WSGR has transitioned to less early stage work and more capital markets/large SV public co representation. Probably a much better path to Facebook in-house at WSGR than Latham. I don’t even know how much Latham SV/SF really plays in that space - anecdotally I haven’t seen them there.

1950 vs 1900 is a wash, and don’t know enough about the two cultures (or what a good culture is to you).

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:56 pm

Having spent time at/worked across these firms, WSGR is a better choice given your goals. They have a deeper bench of "sexy" pubco clients (think Tesla, Square, Lyft vs. a bunch of small biotech companies) and a greater share of IPO work.

The billable requirement doesn't mean anything. You will work a lot at both firms. At WSGR, your quality of life will depend heavily on the group that you join, so do your diligence beforehand.

Re: culture, see the note about WSGR's groups above. That said, Latham SV seems to have an tough culture overall, which I suspect has something to do with the economics of that office. This is purely speculation as I don't know how profitable that office is, but they do a lot of startup work and their rates for that kind of work undercut the other firms in the area. At the same time, they've aggressively poached partners from other firms in the past few years, which generally is a risky move since lateraling partners demand high comp but can't guarantee that their clients will move with them. These are factors that do not tend to improve the associate experience.

rubyhenrietta

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:03 pm

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by rubyhenrietta » Mon Jan 20, 2020 4:33 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Having spent time at/worked across these firms, WSGR is a better choice given your goals. They have a deeper bench of "sexy" pubco clients (think Tesla, Square, Lyft vs. a bunch of small biotech companies) and a greater share of IPO work.

The billable requirement doesn't mean anything. You will work a lot at both firms. At WSGR, your quality of life will depend heavily on the group that you join, so do your diligence beforehand.

Re: culture, see the note about WSGR's groups above. That said, Latham SV seems to have an tough culture overall, which I suspect has something to do with the economics of that office. This is purely speculation as I don't know how profitable that office is, but they do a lot of startup work and their rates for that kind of work undercut the other firms in the area. At the same time, they've aggressively poached partners from other firms in the past few years, which generally is a risky move since lateraling partners demand high comp but can't guarantee that their clients will move with them. These are factors that do not tend to improve the associate experience.
Could you give me more background on the groups? Unfortunately as a lateral I don't get to "choose" one, so I would sit with the one I interviewed for.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 20, 2020 7:47 pm

Not poster above, but the group with the toughest culture is probably saper. They seem to have great exit ops tho.

Pacific is pretty large, so their culture is kind of all over the place.

No idea on presidio and the rest.

Mods please leave Anon. My post history would easily identify me.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:40 am

My understanding is that Presidio is even larger than Pacific, so same issue applies.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:16 pm

Not the previous Saper poster...but mods, this would also out me, so please leave anon.

I am ex-Saper, and ex-Latham. I would choose WSGR. Latham is very large, very global and not necessarily corporate-focused. WSGR is comparatively much smaller (as a firm), but is still enormous and has a huge client base. WSGR is also very corporate-focused, and if that's what you want to do, the level of collaboration cross-firm, precedents, and alumni all over the Valley is high. My network is insane. Cosign that your experience at WSGR will vary considerably by group, but even within groups, there are different partners. WSGR does have great exit opps, an incredible training program, and a strong focus on precedents and form base to make your work more efficient (e.g. you don't have to spend time finding stuff--you can just do the work).

Latham has a few true ogre partners (cough, Pohlen, cough) and, as a firm, I saw some ethical lapses that made me deeply uncomfortable. The best part about Latham was the really physically lovely SV office, leaving, followed only by the great alumni group (also strong). I will note that the GC and AGC Corporate of Tesla are friends...from my time at Latham. I am not sure if they now use WSGR (I haven't been at WSGR for a few years). That said, there are some really, really awesome Latham SV partners--I loved them.

I'd also like to say, as a Saper group alum...I have so many "hilarious" Jeff stories. One of my favorites was when he walked into a group meeting, realized he knew almost none of his associate's names (even though some of them had been there more than a year, and then said, "Wow, you all are one of my favorite groups of Saper associates in a while." because he couldn't think of what else to say. It really made us feel like we were known and special. The rest of the partners in the group are very good, especially Steve Bernard and Rezwan Pavri, (but Rez is a beast in terms of how hard he works--but his clients are amazing.)

Either way, you're going to be able to get in-house. And BTW, many young law school grads find VC work more sexy (it's not, but there's a perception), so having public company skills is very highly in demand on the in-house side, because there's less folks floating around the Valley who have a strong skillset in that looking to go in-house.

Good luck.

Amicus_Curiae2013

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 10:46 pm

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Amicus_Curiae2013 » Thu Dec 03, 2020 5:38 am

Can anyone please comment on the corporate practice at Wilson (SF)?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Dec 05, 2020 2:15 am

Wow, amazing, specific thread. I love it. I too am a Saper alum. Great group. Top notch SV corporate training. Does have a reputation for being one of the hardest working but the public and mature clients are top notch. Pacific Group is a very good option too in a similar vein. Presidio is a big old hodgepodge with a small group doing some very good public company work and but I don't think it's worth it if you want mature companies because you have to fight off a lot of shitty work. Sierra is okay.

Latham is a good if that's your option but I would go with Wilson and aim for Pacific and Saper and try to create some boundaries.

ETA: Ah shit didn't realize this was necro. Nope, sorry, can't comment much on the SF group other than I don't think it's been a very stable presence. Unfortunately it's not really like PA WSGR. That's WSGR biggest weakness. No real SF presence.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:04 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 2:15 am
Wow, amazing, specific thread. I love it. I too am a Saper alum. Great group. Top notch SV corporate training. Does have a reputation for being one of the hardest working but the public and mature clients are top notch. Pacific Group is a very good option too in a similar vein. Presidio is a big old hodgepodge with a small group doing some very good public company work and but I don't think it's worth it if you want mature companies because you have to fight off a lot of shitty work. Sierra is okay.

Latham is a good if that's your option but I would go with Wilson and aim for Pacific and Saper and try to create some boundaries.

ETA: Ah shit didn't realize this was necro. Nope, sorry, can't comment much on the SF group other than I don't think it's been a very stable presence. Unfortunately it's not really like PA WSGR. That's WSGR biggest weakness. No real SF presence.
Current WSGR corporate associate - I disagree that our SF offices are a weakness. That might have been true in years prior, but a lot of the best M&A at the firm is done out of the SF office and the SoMa office has a very strong emerging company practice.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:22 pm

Could you go into a bit more about what the WSGR SF M&A group is like? Do people seem happy/overworked/burned out/itching to leave? Is culture and workload in line with the rest of WSGR corporate?

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 06, 2020 5:40 pm

I worked in one of these Latham offices and I found that there were serious cultural issues for women, minorities, and gay associates. I can’t speak to WSGR, but I would stay away from L&W.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:19 pm

This is a dealbreaker

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm

Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.

User avatar
parkslope

Bronze
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 5:00 pm

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by parkslope » Sun Dec 06, 2020 8:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there.
quelle horreur!

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:18 am

If you are a 2L — go to WSGR’s website and look up the recent hire associates in SF and PA. Then go to Latham’s website and do the same for SF and SV.

I think you’ll see a wide gap in talent b/t the firms. Should give you an indication of where the brightest students (with the most options) are headed...
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.

Second this sentiment. WSGR associates above are spewing absolute falsities. They can knock Latham’s prestige all they want (watch out for Cooley, cough cough...) but the stats don’t lie. Go to the actual firm websites and browse the newer associates. The brightest are going to Latham, not WSGR. It’s easy to see.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:41 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.

Second this sentiment. WSGR associates above are spewing absolute falsities. They can knock Latham’s prestige all they want (watch out for Cooley, cough cough...) but the stats don’t lie. Go to the actual firm websites and browse the newer associates. The brightest are going to Latham, not WSGR. It’s easy to see.
Anon because I work at one of the SV native firms.

Are the two Anon posts quoted immediately above the same poster sock-puppeting? Perhaps the same user who posted something equally outlandish this morning about firm RPL differences reflecting the "talent gap" between WSGR and Latham, and then deleted the comment? Seems to be lots of intense focus on preftige and late-night combing through new associate profiles. Do people actually do this with their free time?

To 2Ls who might be reading this thread... If you find yourself reading these two anon posts above, nodding your head and thinking "Wow, this guy (or gal) is making some great points"... You may want to focus your recruiting efforts in NYC. That's not intended as a rip on NYC, but I hope for your sake that this sort of attitude is more acceptable there or perhaps gets washed out given the bigger market size. In any case, I know we definitely don't need more associates like this around here. SV/SF is a small legal world and a reputation for this sort of attitude will spread quickly. Thinking that your [insert honors] degree from [insert top school] somehow automatically qualifies you as a better legal talent is not going to be a great look as you start your legal career. Pretty sure we all could be doing 90+% of our biglaw tasks with only our high school degrees anyway.

There are lots of great reasons to choose Latham; there are lots of great reasons to choose WSGR (or Cooley or Fenwick or Gunderson or... etc.). Get to know the market, the practice areas, the groups, the clients, the deal flow and then just go with your gut. At least from the lawyers I've worked with at both of those firms, I'm not sure either would be a good fit for people who take such an obsessive interest in scrolling associate profiles on law firm websites. Might be best to keep that to yourself when interviewing.

dabigchina

Gold
Posts: 1826
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by dabigchina » Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:33 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.
I would really caution against taking advice from people who didn't work at any firm full time.

Toxic firms tend to have cool summer programs.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:52 am

dabigchina wrote:
Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:33 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.
I would really caution against taking advice from people who didn't work at any firm full time.

Toxic firms tend to have cool summer programs.
The summer program was fine, but yes I didn't comment on the firm's work environment for a reason, just its rep among the Chicago network and who it tends to hire. (To the extent you were suggesting this, I think it's absurd to suggest that there's a correlation between "coolness" of a summer program and toxicity a the firm, though.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jan 14, 2021 1:00 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:46 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:41 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:24 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:55 pm
Yes, it was for me too. I don’t know if you are lateraling from the Bay Area, but it is well known at Stanford Law School Office of Career Services and U.C. Berkeley School of Law Office of Career Services that Latham is extremely cliquish, fratty and a they-love-you-or-they-hate-you kind of place. Both schools actively advise their top students of this, as well. If you do not conform to that culture, they will throw you out. They’re losing out on a lot of quality talent this way.

I also don’t think Latham is in any way a peer of a firm like Skadden Arps, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk or Simpson Thacher or concentrates anywhere the quality of credentials and prestige as those firms, irrespective of what Vault says. Lots of sub-HYSCCN and even sub-T14 resumes there. So I would completely set aside the Vault ranking when thinking about Latham.
This is complete BS. Latham has an excellent rep at Chicago for being an unusually happy place to work for biglaw--not positive on SV in particular, where the Chicago network isn't big, but in Chicago, DC, TX, LA. And unless Stanford's OCS is far more helpful than most advising students to stay away from top biglaw firms is just not something career services do. Also, at Chicago, Latham is about as popular and selective as DPW/Cleary and generally more popular and significantly more selective than Skadden/STB (depends on market and practice obviously bc students aren't insane).

Full disclosure I summered at Latham but didn't go back for other reasons and know the composition of my summer class (completely in my office and roughly nationally). Their lawyers are overwhelmingly either T14, and in DC often top of the class at T14s with quite a few feeder/SCOTUS clerks, or summa grads from local schools, just like any other BL firm.

Second this sentiment. WSGR associates above are spewing absolute falsities. They can knock Latham’s prestige all they want (watch out for Cooley, cough cough...) but the stats don’t lie. Go to the actual firm websites and browse the newer associates. The brightest are going to Latham, not WSGR. It’s easy to see.
Anon because I work at one of the SV native firms.

Are the two Anon posts quoted immediately above the same poster sock-puppeting? Perhaps the same user who posted something equally outlandish this morning about firm RPL differences reflecting the "talent gap" between WSGR and Latham, and then deleted the comment? Seems to be lots of intense focus on preftige and late-night combing through new associate profiles. Do people actually do this with their free time?

To 2Ls who might be reading this thread... If you find yourself reading these two anon posts above, nodding your head and thinking "Wow, this guy (or gal) is making some great points"... You may want to focus your recruiting efforts in NYC. That's not intended as a rip on NYC, but I hope for your sake that this sort of attitude is more acceptable there or perhaps gets washed out given the bigger market size. In any case, I know we definitely don't need more associates like this around here. SV/SF is a small legal world and a reputation for this sort of attitude will spread quickly. Thinking that your [insert honors] degree from [insert top school] somehow automatically qualifies you as a better legal talent is not going to be a great look as you start your legal career. Pretty sure we all could be doing 90+% of our biglaw tasks with only our high school degrees anyway.

There are lots of great reasons to choose Latham; there are lots of great reasons to choose WSGR (or Cooley or Fenwick or Gunderson or... etc.). Get to know the market, the practice areas, the groups, the clients, the deal flow and then just go with your gut. At least from the lawyers I've worked with at both of those firms, I'm not sure either would be a good fit for people who take such an obsessive interest in scrolling associate profiles on law firm websites. Might be best to keep that to yourself when interviewing.
I am the second anon in this chain and do not agree with the third. I agree with you on all of this; both of these are undoubtedly excellent firms with excellent attorneys and pickiness on credentials is an exceptionally silly way to pick where you want to practice. I was just responding to the dumb, defamation-esque WSGR-supremacism in the first post, which it sounds like you disagree with as well.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358486
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:50 am

Can anyone please comment on the strength of the corporate practice at WSGR (SF), the people, culture etc... I recently spoke to a hiring partner at one of WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick. It appears that besides hiring a few people at the entry level, they focus on laterals from V5/V10 who have been already trained and hit the ground running. I have also heard of people moving to WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick only to exit out because of the type of work they end up doing. Would most rather join WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick as a lateral vs. a first year to give themselves more flexibility in their career choice?

attorney589753

New
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2020 12:42 pm

Re: WSGR (SV) or Latham (SV/SF)?

Post by attorney589753 » Sat Jan 23, 2021 1:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:50 am
Can anyone please comment on the strength of the corporate practice at WSGR (SF), the people, culture etc... I recently spoke to a hiring partner at one of WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick. It appears that besides hiring a few people at the entry level, they focus on laterals from V5/V10 who have been already trained and hit the ground running. I have also heard of people moving to WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick only to exit out because of the type of work they end up doing. Would most rather join WSGR/Cooley/Gunderson/Fenwick as a lateral vs. a first year to give themselves more flexibility in their career choice?
If you want to do silicon valley work (VC/EC/Startup) and you have an option to join one of the top firms as a first year, that's the move. When you say exit out - typically to in-house positions within the sector? Isn't that the goal? If interested in that practice area then I don't think it makes sense from any perspective to start at a V10 and then lateral over (even though you may be able to do it).

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”