Quality of Life in California Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi all -- I'm thinking about post-clerkship life (JD > D. Ct. > COA). In no particular order, I'm currently considering applying to:

Northern California
(1) Keker
(2) Orrick (either lit or appellate)
(3) MTO
(4) Farella

Southern California
(1) O'Melveny (LA or Newport)
(2) Hueston Hennigan
(3) Susman
(4) Dovel & Luner
(5) Irell (CC or Newport)
(6) MTO

Which firm do you all think has -- all things considered -- the best quality of life? I'm particularly thinking about hours and type of work (interested in general lit/white collar). I have a family so I am trying to avoid a sweatshop.

I know this is broad, but would love to hear some of your thoughts.

[LBJ's Hair]

my first reaction is that this is an ... ambitious ... list for any non-SCOTUS clerk, and you should apply to more Orrick-like places. but maybe you're sitting on a return offer from a good firm so only listing places you'd actually leave it for.

anyway, would cross off Susman, for starters. SG is SG but you don't go there for work-life balance

[Anonymous User]

CA is such a big area and so diverse in everything from climate, ecosystem, demographics, socio-economics, political extremes, it's really hard to give an answer for the full state or even northern vs southern.

[Anonymous User]

Echoing that this is a strange and ambitious list

My understanding is that Dovel & Luner and Irell (post-departures) are pretty much patent boutiques

I have never heard of Farella before but it performed very well in Vault's satisfaction, hours, etc. rankings

[Anonymous User]

As someone who practices in LA, this is a very weird list.

Orrick and Farella will probably give you the best combination of lifestyle and good professional development. (MTO might as well, although I have heard very different things about what hours expectations look like there.).

Hueston Hennigan and Susman are very, very intense (but will give you really good substantive experience); Irell and Dovel & Luner are both very patent-heavy firms and not lifestyle places or places that are good for generalists; Keker is also quite intense and very white-collar focused; and OMM is both a sweatshop and somewhere that will not give you any meaningful professional development.

[Anonymous User]

As someone who practices in LA, this is a very weird list.

Orrick and Farella will probably give you the best combination of lifestyle and good professional development. (MTO might as well, although I have heard very different things about what hours expectations look like there.).

Hueston Hennigan and Susman are very, very intense (but will give you really good substantive experience); Irell and Dovel & Luner are both very patent-heavy firms and not lifestyle places or places that are good for generalists; Keker is also quite intense and very white-collar focused; and OMM is both a sweatshop and somewhere that will not give you any meaningful professional development.

Curious why you say this about OMM? The perception among law students (undoubtedly fed by Vault) is that it’s a happy place to be an associate

Also OP unless you have a job at one already why are you not considering GDC and Latham, which probably make much more sense than eg Dovel or Susman for your goals

[Anonymous User]

As someone who practices in LA, this is a very weird list.

Orrick and Farella will probably give you the best combination of lifestyle and good professional development. (MTO might as well, although I have heard very different things about what hours expectations look like there.).

Hueston Hennigan and Susman are very, very intense (but will give you really good substantive experience); Irell and Dovel & Luner are both very patent-heavy firms and not lifestyle places or places that are good for generalists; Keker is also quite intense and very white-collar focused; and OMM is both a sweatshop and somewhere that will not give you any meaningful professional development.

Curious why you say this about OMM? The perception among law students (undoubtedly fed by Vault) is that it’s a happy place to be an associate

Also OP unless you have a job at one already why are you not considering GDC and Latham, which probably make much more sense than eg Dovel or Susman for your goals

OMM is absolutely not a good firm to be an associate, despite what Vault surveys suggest. It might not be the absolute worst in terms of hours/lifestyle (and is significantly better in DTLA than Century City), but the professional development opportunities are garbage and the culture is toxic. I agree that OP should also consider GDC and Latham, particularly if he/she wants to be in LA (not that their SF offices are "bad," but they are significantly inferior to the LA offices).

[plantcoveredbuilding]

my first reaction is that this is an ... ambitious ... list for any non-SCOTUS clerk, and you should apply to more Orrick-like places. but maybe you're sitting on a return offer from a good firm so only listing places you'd actually leave it for.

anyway, would cross off Susman, for starters. SG is SG but you don't go there for work-life balance

What a perfect microcosm of the advice on this forum. A guy who is probably in law school or a recent grad, who has no first-hand experience with any of the firms, sh**s on SG as the only sweatshop (as if the partners at the other firms will choose your personal happiness over more billable hours and money in their pocket) and Orrick as a low-tier firm (partners at Orrick make $2.3 million), based on some nonsense he read here, and who thinks you need a SCOTUS clerkship to work as an associate at MTO or Irell.

[Anonymous User]

OMM is absolutely not a good firm to be an associate, despite what Vault surveys suggest. It might not be the absolute worst in terms of hours/lifestyle (and is significantly better in DTLA than Century City), but the professional development opportunities are garbage and the culture is toxic. I agree that OP should also consider GDC and Latham, particularly if he/she wants to be in LA (not that their SF offices are "bad," but they are significantly inferior to the LA offices).

Could you elaborate on why prof dev opportunities are garbage and the culture is toxic? I do not know anyone at the firm and could not get much from Chambers.

[Anonymous User]

[*]

Hi all -- I'm thinking about post-clerkship life (JD > D. Ct. > COA). In no particular order, I'm currently considering applying to:

Northern California
(1) Keker
(2) Orrick (either lit or appellate)
(3) MTO
(4) Farella

Southern California
(1) O'Melveny (LA or Newport)
(2) Hueston Hennigan
(3) Susman
(4) Dovel & Luner
(5) Irell (CC or Newport)
(6) MTO

Which firm do you all think has -- all things considered -- the best quality of life? I'm particularly thinking about hours and type of work (interested in general lit/white collar). I have a family so I am trying to avoid a sweatshop.

I know this is broad, but would love to hear some of your thoughts.

This is a weird list if your priority is qualify of life. Some of the more hours-intensive firms California are on here (Susman, HH, Keker).

Not sure I understand listing appellate only for Orrick. Orrick’s appellate group is very good, but also very difficult to land a job in. If you’re interested in appellate, you should also apply to other places with appellate opportunities (in LA, that would be Gibson Dunn, Munger, maybe Latham/O’Melveny).

I wouldn’t go to Irell right now—lots of uncertainty about where they’re going to be in 5 years.

[GoneSouth]

my first reaction is that this is an ... ambitious ... list for any non-SCOTUS clerk, and you should apply to more Orrick-like places. but maybe you're sitting on a return offer from a good firm so only listing places you'd actually leave it for.

anyway, would cross off Susman, for starters. SG is SG but you don't go there for work-life balance

This is really not that ambitious of a list coming off a COA clerkship, especially if it’s CA9. There’s still a little uncertainty about how COVID is going to affect post-clerkship hiring this year, but in normal times, a CA9 clerk would have a really good chance of getting an offer at at least one of these

[Iowahawk]

my first reaction is that this is an ... ambitious ... list for any non-SCOTUS clerk, and you should apply to more Orrick-like places. but maybe you're sitting on a return offer from a good firm so only listing places you'd actually leave it for.

anyway, would cross off Susman, for starters. SG is SG but you don't go there for work-life balance

What a perfect microcosm of the advice on this forum. A guy who is probably in law school or a recent grad, who has no first-hand experience with any of the firms, sh**s on SG as the only sweatshop (as if the partners at the other firms will choose your personal happiness over more billable hours and money in their pocket) and Orrick as a low-tier firm (partners at Orrick make $2.3 million), based on some nonsense he read here, and who thinks you need a SCOTUS clerkship to work as an associate at MTO or Irell.

Very over-the-top reaction to an innocuous (and correct, from what others are saying about the CA market) comment tbh. Did it say SG is the only sweatshop or that Orrick is "low-tier"? And it *is* very hard to get a job at MTO, even with a circuit clerkship (there are maybe 150 CA9 clerks every year), and putting your eggs in more baskets is probably good advice for anything like this

[LBJ's Hair]

my first reaction is that this is an ... ambitious ... list for any non-SCOTUS clerk, and you should apply to more Orrick-like places. but maybe you're sitting on a return offer from a good firm so only listing places you'd actually leave it for.

anyway, would cross off Susman, for starters. SG is SG but you don't go there for work-life balance

What a perfect microcosm of the advice on this forum. A guy who is probably in law school or a recent grad, who has no first-hand experience with any of the firms, sh**s on SG as the only sweatshop (as if the partners at the other firms will choose your personal happiness over more billable hours and money in their pocket) and Orrick as a low-tier firm (partners at Orrick make $2.3 million), based on some nonsense he read here, and who thinks you need a SCOTUS clerkship to work as an associate at MTO or Irell.

?

didn't say Susman is the only sweatshop, just know for a fact it is one of them

didn't say Orrick is bad. and I don't think that. in fact I think people in OP's position should flesh out their lists with more firms like Orrick. ie firms that will offer more than a couple people

didn't say that "nobody outside of SCOTUS can get a job at MTO." OP is probably perfectly qualified. the problem is that MTO, Keker, Dovel, etc don't hire many people. (Dovel probably goes years w/o hiring a single clerk tbh.) so even if you're a COA clerk with great grades from a good school, unless you're a guaranteed offer--like a SCOTUS clerk--you should probably apply to large CA firms as well to make sure you end your cycle with a job.

this is just practical advice that applies to pretty much everyone's post-clerkship job search: look broadly. unless you're sitting on a return offer you're happy with, in which case sure, apply only to reach firms

and maybe that's OP's position, idk

[terrag103]

SG may not be the only sweatshop, but it is notorious for demanding an especially brutal schedule in exchange for astonishing bonuses. I had a callback there and this is how both the associates and partners portrayed it.

[Anonymous User]

Hi all -- I'm thinking about post-clerkship life (JD > D. Ct. > COA). In no particular order, I'm currently considering applying to:

Northern California
(3) MTO


Southern California
(6) MTO

Which firm do you all think has -- all things considered -- the best quality of life? I'm particularly thinking about hours and type of work (interested in general lit/white collar). I have a family so I am trying to avoid a sweatshop.

I know this is broad, but would love to hear some of your thoughts.

Based on that, I've revised your list. And MTO is ridiculously competitive -- all of these firms are but back when I was applying, MTO was the lifestyle + good partnership prospects + california firm, like an absolute unicorn

[Anonymous User]

Hi all -- I'm thinking about post-clerkship life (JD > D. Ct. > COA). In no particular order, I'm currently considering applying to:

Northern California
(3) MTO


Southern California
(6) MTO

Which firm do you all think has -- all things considered -- the best quality of life? I'm particularly thinking about hours and type of work (interested in general lit/white collar). I have a family so I am trying to avoid a sweatshop.

I know this is broad, but would love to hear some of your thoughts.

Based on that, I've revised your list. And MTO is ridiculously competitive -- all of these firms are but back when I was applying, MTO was the lifestyle + good partnership prospects + california firm, like an absolute unicorn

MTO is not a lifestyle firm. People still work hard, they just don't work hard in the office (which may have been a selling point pre-COVID, but may be a moot point these days). So while people at MTO go home at 5 or 6 to be with their kids, they're usually logging on after dinner and working until bedtime.

I only have knowledge of Keker, Susman, and MTO and I'll just say this: everyone at these firms is an over-achiever, and almost everyone at these firms enjoys practicing law. The result is intense commitment to work. Keker and Susman obviously do a lot of trials which are, by definition, intense, so you're going to have to be okay with that if you want to work there.

[jessuf]

if you have a family, stay away from Northern California

[Anonymous User]

if you have a family, stay away from Northern California

why?

[The Lsat Airbender]

if you have a family, stay away from Northern California

why?

Your house will be overpriced and then burn down anyway, also TLS posters will seduce your husband/wife

[Anonymous User]

Anon because I practice in the Bay Area and went to Berkeley. You should seriously consider Farella. It had a great reputation while I was doing OCI and, while I don’t have firsthand knowledge of this, I did hear that it’s more work-life friendly than biglaw more generally.

[Anonymous User]

OMM is absolutely not a good firm to be an associate, despite what Vault surveys suggest. It might not be the absolute worst in terms of hours/lifestyle (and is significantly better in DTLA than Century City), but the professional development opportunities are garbage and the culture is toxic. I agree that OP should also consider GDC and Latham, particularly if he/she wants to be in LA (not that their SF offices are "bad," but they are significantly inferior to the LA offices).

Could you elaborate on why prof dev opportunities are garbage and the culture is toxic? I do not know anyone at the firm and could not get much from Chambers.

I know many OMM refugees - I'll leave it at that. (To be clear, I don't subscribe to the crazy ramblings of that man who periodically posts on TLS about how OMM is an evil, awful place. I just think it has a shitty culture and does not give associates good professional development opportunities, which is also true of many other firms. OP presumably has the credentials to be a bit more choosy, which is why I'd recommend staying away from it.)

The comment by the "MTO is not a lifestyle firm" poster is spot-on, based on my conversations with folks who who work there. It's not a sweatshop in the same way that Susman or K&E or the big NYC firms are sweatshops - I think there's a very good chance you could bill 2000-2200 hours year in year out, particularly if your practice is not trial-focused. And you will work on sophisticated matters, be surrounded by brilliant people, and get really exceptional training (if only through osmosis). But that doesn't make it a lifestyle firm by any means.

[hangtime813]

Anon because I practice in the Bay Area and went to Berkeley. You should seriously consider Farella. It had a great reputation while I was doing OCI and, while I don’t have firsthand knowledge of this, I did hear that it’s more work-life friendly than biglaw more generally.

+1 to this. Farella is a smaller shop but at least in SF, its highly regarded. They have a lot of connections to SF including former local politicians on staff. If you want to practice and stay in SF, Farella should be seriously considered.

[Anonymous User]

Somewhat related question: what's the general perception of the CA satellite offices of more D.C.-focused firms? Specifically curious about Covington, Arnold & Porter, and Hogan Lovells.

[Anonymous User]

Could those recommending Latham and GDC elaborate a bit more on how they compare in terms of QOL?

[Anonymous User]

Somewhat related question: what's the general perception of the CA satellite offices of more D.C.-focused firms? Specifically curious about Covington, Arnold & Porter, and Hogan Lovells.

My sense (from practicing in CA) is that Covington and A&P both have good reputations in California and that their Bay Area offices are stronger than their LA counterparts. This is particularly true for A&P, which absorbed a very good San Francisco firm (Howard Rice) around a decade ago. They are both reportedly pretty good places for work-life balance as biglaw goes. I don't think Hogan is a major player in CA, at least not for litigation work.