Susman Godfrey 5th Year Associate - AMA Forum

[thisismytlsuername]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

[SG-Lawyer]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

Sure did

[Anonymous User]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

Sure did

Congrats! Could we bother you for updates on the firm post-pandemic? How's the business outlook? Is the partnership compensation model still the same?

[SG-Lawyer]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

Sure did

Congrats! Could we bother you for updates on the firm post-pandemic? How's the business outlook? Is the partnership compensation model still the same?

Business outlook remains the same. There are very few firms with as much trial experience (all the way down to associates), so demand for experienced trial lawyers in big ticket cases remains steady regardless of the economic conditions. Our approach to compensation remains the same as well.

Like every firm, we're still figuring out the right mix of work from home vs in office work. Historically, our firm has never had a "face time" requirement. I can legitimately count on one hand the number of times I stayed at the office past 6:30 pm as an associate. And I would often work from home pre-pandemic if I didn't need to be in the office, especially the day(s) after returning from taking a depo that occurred somewhere else in the country/world. But when everyone works from home 24/7, it takes away some of the training opportunities for new associates, as well as opportunities to integrate new people into the culture of the firm.

[Anonymous User]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

Sure did

Congrats! Could we bother you for updates on the firm post-pandemic? How's the business outlook? Is the partnership compensation model still the same?

Business outlook remains the same. There are very few firms with as much trial experience (all the way down to associates), so demand for experienced trial lawyers in big ticket cases remains steady regardless of the economic conditions. Our approach to compensation remains the same as well.

Like every firm, we're still figuring out the right mix of work from home vs in office work. Historically, our firm has never had a "face time" requirement. I can legitimately count on one hand the number of times I stayed at the office past 6:30 pm as an associate. And I would often work from home pre-pandemic if I didn't need to be in the office, especially the day(s) after returning from taking a depo that occurred somewhere else in the country/world. But when everyone works from home 24/7, it takes away some of the training opportunities for new associates, as well as opportunities to integrate new people into the culture of the firm.

I'm a mid-level associate at a trial boutique. I've litigated several cases, but because of the pandemic and some last-minute settlements, I have not been to trial. I went to HYS and clerked for a federal judge. I had good but not excellent grades in law school and I've gotten very good reviews at my current firm. What are my chances at being hired by Susman as a lateral and do laterals have a realistic shot at partner?

[Anonymous User]

Congrats on the partnership. Curious what your comp was as a partner last year. Recall you saying very early on in this thread that it is a unique comp model for partners based (almost?) entirely on valued-added.

[Anonymous User]

Congrats on the partnership. Curious what your comp was as a partner last year. Recall you saying very early on in this thread that it is a unique comp model for partners based (almost?) entirely on valued-added.

Also very curious about this, even in you can only give a non-specific answer. How much of the firm's reported PPP comes from rainmakers vs. junior partners?

[SG-Lawyer]

Congrats on the partnership. Curious what your comp was as a partner last year. Recall you saying very early on in this thread that it is a unique comp model for partners based (almost?) entirely on valued-added.

Also very curious about this, even in you can only give a non-specific answer. How much of the firm's reported PPP comes from rainmakers vs. junior partners?

We don't publicly release our PPP figures. Nor do we disclose individual partner compensation. But I can tell you that it is very rewarding being a Susman Godfrey partner. And our comp structure is one of the reasons our firm is successful. Each partner's distribution is based whether they brought in a case or whether you are only working on the case for another partner who brought it in. If you brought in the case (or part of a group of partners who brought in a case) then you receive a certain percentage of all fees generated by that case. If you only work on a case without have credit for bringing it in, then you get a certain percentage of your hourly rate. While you can do extremely well only working on cases brought in by other partners, it is clearly more lucrative to bring the case to the firm. That has helped incentivize young partners to develop business rather than ride coattails. So unlike other firms, we are not dependent on a few senior partners. And we have a clear cut distribution process that avoids internal disputes over fee splits, which can be common at other firms.

The compensation model also helps ensure associates get great work. A partners' best use of their time is to generate cases rather than work on other partner's cases. In turn, there are fewer partners hoarding good assignments to generate hours for comp purposes, which leaves more fun tasks for associates like depo opportunities, stand up time, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Congrats on the partnership. Curious what your comp was as a partner last year. Recall you saying very early on in this thread that it is a unique comp model for partners based (almost?) entirely on valued-added.

Also very curious about this, even in you can only give a non-specific answer. How much of the firm's reported PPP comes from rainmakers vs. junior partners?

We don't publicly release our PPP figures. Nor do we disclose individual partner compensation. But I can tell you that it is very rewarding being a Susman Godfrey partner. And our comp structure is one of the reasons our firm is successful. Each partner's distribution is based whether they brought in a case or whether you are only working on the case for another partner who brought it in. If you brought in the case (or part of a group of partners who brought in a case) then you receive a certain percentage of all fees generated by that case. If you only work on a case without have credit for bringing it in, then you get a certain percentage of your hourly rate. While you can do extremely well only working on cases brought in by other partners, it is clearly more lucrative to bring the case to the firm. That has helped incentivize young partners to develop business rather than ride coattails. So unlike other firms, we are not dependent on a few senior partners. And we have a clear cut distribution process that avoids internal disputes over fee splits, which can be common at other firms.

The compensation model also helps ensure associates get great work. A partners' best use of their time is to generate cases rather than work on other partner's cases. In turn, there are fewer partners hoarding good assignments to generate hours for comp purposes, which leaves more fun tasks for associates like depo opportunities, stand up time, etc.

How many of the 1st years you started with are still with the firm 4 or 5 years later? Similar attrition to biglaw? Why?

[SG-Lawyer]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

How much of your time is spend drafting motions/researching and writing vs. taking depos, being in trial, etc. I am a corp. lawyer who split Lit and Corp and chose Corp because I saw "litigators" just sitting in their office doing what felt like LRW in law school (which was the class I disliked the most) and they generally made less than on the corporate side. Partner in M&A at a V10, still always wonder if I would have been "happier" as a litigator (I did mock trial in HS and College and really enjoyed it).

[SG-Lawyer]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

How much of your time is spend drafting motions/researching and writing vs. taking depos, being in trial, etc. I am a corp. lawyer who split Lit and Corp and chose Corp because I saw "litigators" just sitting in their office doing what felt like LRW in law school (which was the class I disliked the most) and they generally made less than on the corporate side. Partner in M&A at a V10, still always wonder if I would have been "happier" as a litigator (I did mock trial in HS and College and really enjoyed it).

There's an ebb and flow to litigation. It totally depends on where your cases are in their life cycle. Sometimes all the cases on your docket are pre or post discovery, so you're doing a lot of brief writing. And other times it feels like all of your cases are up against a discovery deadline and you're taking nonstop depos. I'll be taking 2 depos a week and defending 2 depos a week (alternating weeks) all over the country until July, so right now I am slammed with discovery.

I'm sure it's different at other firms, which tend to task more junior lawyers with small pieces of the case. At SG, even as a young associate, you're writing entire briefs as opposed to inserts. And generally, if you write it, you argue it.

[thisismytlsuername]

We have a six year track and making partner is very realistic.

Did you make partner?

Sure did

Nice, congrats on being rich.

I'll be taking 2 depos a week and defending 2 depos a week (alternating weeks) all over the country until July, so right now I am slammed with discovery.

This sounds like a fucking nightmare.

[Anonymous User]

Hi, thanks for keeping this thread up to date. I was wondering if you could speak about cultural differences between offices. Do you know of the LA, Houston, or NYC offices attracting very different personalities or having different cultures (ie. NY could have a greater face-time requirement, etc.). Would you say the firm is consistent across all offices?

Separately, do you think specific offices focus on specific types of litigation based on geography or partner allocation?

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

[Anonymous User]

Can you assume 1:1 leverage?

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

Hadn’t realized the firm had more partners than associates. They must work a ton. Would seem to affect the calculus/desirability of staying and working for life as a partner, I’d think?

[SG-Lawyer]

Hi, thanks for keeping this thread up to date. I was wondering if you could speak about cultural differences between offices. Do you know of the LA, Houston, or NYC offices attracting very different personalities or having different cultures (ie. NY could have a greater face-time requirement, etc.). Would you say the firm is consistent across all offices?

Separately, do you think specific offices focus on specific types of litigation based on geography or partner allocation?

We staff cases across offices, meet weekly by zoom, and have multiple firm wide retreats every year. Culture is pretty consistent across offices.

NY office has a bit more securities cases, but those cases are still often staffed across offices. For example, my colleague in Houston has been working on LIBOR for years with partners in NY. Overall, individual partners have preferences that matter more (ie Partner A does a lot of patent litigation, Partner B does a lot of class action work, Partner C brings in a ton of fixed fee defense side work).

[SG-Lawyer]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

It is very, very rare for someone to make it to the partnership vote and get voted down. Without looking at data, I'd estimate less than 5 people in the past 15 years.

[SG-Lawyer]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

Hadn’t realized the firm had more partners than associates. They must work a ton. Would seem to affect the calculus/desirability of staying and working for life as a partner, I’d think?

Partners work as much or as little as they want. We circulate hours for every lawyer each month. Partners work far less than associates.

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

Hadn’t realized the firm had more partners than associates. They must work a ton. Would seem to affect the calculus/desirability of staying and working for life as a partner, I’d think?

Partners work as much or as little as they want. We circulate hours for every lawyer each month. Partners work far less than associates.

Is there a reason Susman has this model? Obviously a great firm but a sweatshop for associates with great WLB for partners who want it seems weird. I know of some boutiques that let partners work as much or as little as they want, but they do the same for associates, which seems a bit less odd (though maybe less scalable).

[Anonymous User]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

Hadn’t realized the firm had more partners than associates. They must work a ton. Would seem to affect the calculus/desirability of staying and working for life as a partner, I’d think?

Partners work as much or as little as they want. We circulate hours for every lawyer each month. Partners work far less than associates.

Not questioning you, just curious - if the firm is negatively leveraged and partners aren't doing as much work as associates, who's handling the nuts and bolts of litigation?

[Anonymous User]

Is there a reason Susman has this model? Obviously a great firm but a sweatshop for associates with great WLB for partners who want it seems weird. I know of some boutiques that let partners work as much or as little as they want, but they do the same for associates, which seems a bit less odd (though maybe less scalable).

This actually seems not weird to me. I always thought it odd that the higher up the chain you got in law the more hours you worked or that the hours didn't decrease. A firm where you work really hard early on but then can ease off as you gain seniority or partnership (where you also have a realistic shot) with the added benefit that the hours you do work are more interesting actually seems closer to the ideal. Otherwise what's the point? Who wants to work nonstop after making partner and why is that so normal? Maybe it comes back to something about contingency vs flat billables and leverage. But from an outside, non-distorted biglaw perspective, people would probably think it weird that "more pie" is the payoff for "winning."

Current clerk, former biglaw junior, and now looking at firms like Susman.

[SG-Lawyer]

100% of the first years I started with are still here. And 100% made partner. We are not like normal big law.

Just mathematically, I don’t see how this could be typical. If you assume 1:1 leverage and start with, say, five partners and five associates, you’d have over five thousand lawyers at the firm after 10 years of making people partner (i.e., 2 * (5 * 2 ^ 9)). So what’s the typical winnowing mechanism? People leaving before they are up for partner, or people being voted down when they come up?

The firm does have more partners than associates. Lots of people also leave voluntarily.

Hadn’t realized the firm had more partners than associates. They must work a ton. Would seem to affect the calculus/desirability of staying and working for life as a partner, I’d think?

Partners work as much or as little as they want. We circulate hours for every lawyer each month. Partners work far less than associates.

Is there a reason Susman has this model? Obviously a great firm but a sweatshop for associates with great WLB for partners who want it seems weird. I know of some boutiques that let partners work as much or as little as they want, but they do the same for associates, which seems a bit less odd (though maybe less scalable).

I really don't think of the firm as a sweatshop. The hours are comparable to hours being billed by people making partner in big law, which is the right comparison given the improve chances of making partner at SG. Also, not all hours are created equal. I took dozens and dozens of depos as an associate (25 alone in one patent case in 6 months) involving meaningful deponents, like opposing damages experts and technical employees. To the extent opposing associates even got to attend the depo, they were usually handing binders to the partners. I can count on one hand the number of times an associate took a depo I defended or defended a depo I took. And my experience as an associate at SG isn't an outlier at all. We're spending less time behind a desk writing memos or inserts to briefs and more time with witnesses and in hearings.

Lawyers come out of law school with a decent handle on legal research and writing. But that's about it. Learning how to work up a case to tell a complete story at trial and running the day to day of that case are skills that need to be developed. You need to take a ton of depos to learn how to cross people (and even then, there are multiple approaches to depos that may deviate from what most people think of as a trial cross, depending on what you are trying to accomplish in the depo). You need to go to trial to understand how the months/years of work gets used. So associates are working hard to develop those skills. Once you're a partner, you have put in the hard work and learned the important skills. So you get to work as much or as little as you want.