Houston BigLaw: Vinson & Elkins v Baker Botts Forum

[Anonymous User]

Looking for some insight into these firms. The goal is to go into litigation and stay at the firm long term. I'd really appreciate any insight/advice into which of these two is the best for long term success, given the state of the Houston BL market. For corporate work, the decision usually comes down between VE and a national firm but I'm not sure if the same holds true for litigation. I've heard rumors about Baker Botts pushing expansion and trying to grow but I'm not sure if (1) that's true or (2) if it'll actually have a tangible impact.

[Anonymous User]

Looking for some insight into these firms. The goal is to go into litigation and stay at the firm long term. I'd really appreciate any insight/advice into which of these two is the best for long term success, given the state of the Houston BL market. For corporate work, the decision usually comes down between VE and a national firm but I'm not sure if the same holds true for litigation. I've heard rumors about Baker Botts pushing expansion and trying to grow but I'm not sure if (1) that's true or (2) if it'll actually have a tangible impact.

Neither shop is great for lit. If it were me, I would go to V&E (much more successful firm these days overall, even if only because of corp) and then try to lateral to a top-end Houston boutique later on if you can. Houston is a tough market to be a biglaw litigator.

[Anonymous User]

So for someone pursuing a career in litigation in Houston, are all the boutiques going to better than the biglaw litigation groups? Understandably places like Susman are a notch above but that probably holds true when compared to most biglaw firms. What other boutiques would be better suited than the biglaw litigation groups in Houston?

[Anonymous User]

Neither firm should be anyone's first choice for Houston lit. The boutiques dominate in Houston. On the other hand, the boutiques commonly take litigation laterals from both VE and BB, so there's nothing wrong with starting your career at either. The best case for going to VE is that it is doing better as a firm and is doing better in Houston. The best case for BB is that BB emphasizes ligitation much more so than does VE (that is one of the reasons that BB has lost so much ground to VE in terms of profitability). As a an associate, you'll be paid the same at either firm. If your goal is to make partner, then it is increasingly easier to do that at BB. If you want to lateral to one of the boutiques, then you should choose whichever firm will give you the most substantive work the earliest. That is hard to predict, but it will come down to whichever set of influential partners you have the best connections with.

[Anonymous User]

Neither firm should be anyone's first choice for Houston lit. The boutiques dominate in Houston. On the other hand, the boutiques commonly take litigation laterals from both VE and BB, so there's nothing wrong with starting your career at either. The best case for going to VE is that it is doing better as a firm and is doing better in Houston. The best case for BB is that BB emphasizes ligitation much more so than does VE (that is one of the reasons that BB has lost so much ground to VE in terms of profitability). As a an associate, you'll be paid the same at either firm. If your goal is to make partner, then it is increasingly easier to do that at BB. If you want to lateral to one of the boutiques, then you should choose whichever firm will give you the most substantive work the earliest. That is hard to predict, but it will come down to whichever set of influential partners you have the best connections with.

I'm at BB so maybe biased but I think this is the case for going to BB. These days it is much more of a full service firm than V&E and I think it would offer a lot more opportunities/variety in litigation. Ultimately though I would probably choose based on which people you liked the best (although that may be harder to judge during COVID).

[Anonymous User]

Neither firm should be anyone's first choice for Houston lit. The boutiques dominate in Houston. On the other hand, the boutiques commonly take litigation laterals from both VE and BB, so there's nothing wrong with starting your career at either. The best case for going to VE is that it is doing better as a firm and is doing better in Houston. The best case for BB is that BB emphasizes ligitation much more so than does VE (that is one of the reasons that BB has lost so much ground to VE in terms of profitability). As a an associate, you'll be paid the same at either firm. If your goal is to make partner, then it is increasingly easier to do that at BB. If you want to lateral to one of the boutiques, then you should choose whichever firm will give you the most substantive work the earliest. That is hard to predict, but it will come down to whichever set of influential partners you have the best connections with.

I'm at BB so maybe biased but I think this is the case for going to BB. These days it is much more of a full service firm than V&E and I think it would offer a lot more opportunities/variety in litigation. Ultimately though I would probably choose based on which people you liked the best (although that may be harder to judge during COVID).

Any insight into the future of the firm? BB seems to be trying to turn around the trend it’s seen over the past few years but with its decisions during the pandemic (pay cuts across the board and not paying summers the full amount), I’d really like to see how you think the firm will fare in the future.

[Anonymous User]

Neither firm should be anyone's first choice for Houston lit. The boutiques dominate in Houston. On the other hand, the boutiques commonly take litigation laterals from both VE and BB, so there's nothing wrong with starting your career at either. The best case for going to VE is that it is doing better as a firm and is doing better in Houston. The best case for BB is that BB emphasizes ligitation much more so than does VE (that is one of the reasons that BB has lost so much ground to VE in terms of profitability). As a an associate, you'll be paid the same at either firm. If your goal is to make partner, then it is increasingly easier to do that at BB. If you want to lateral to one of the boutiques, then you should choose whichever firm will give you the most substantive work the earliest. That is hard to predict, but it will come down to whichever set of influential partners you have the best connections with.

I'm at BB so maybe biased but I think this is the case for going to BB. These days it is much more of a full service firm than V&E and I think it would offer a lot more opportunities/variety in litigation. Ultimately though I would probably choose based on which people you liked the best (although that may be harder to judge during COVID).

Would you say that early substantive work is a realistic possibility at BB?

[Anonymous User]

So for someone pursuing a career in litigation in Houston, are all the boutiques going to better than the biglaw litigation groups? Understandably places like Susman are a notch above but that probably holds true when compared to most biglaw firms. What other boutiques would be better suited than the biglaw litigation groups in Houston?

Susman is several notches above. So is Gibbs & Bruns. Other good boutiques (a notch or two above) are Yetter, Reynolds, and Smyser. AZA isn't materially better than biglaw, but it's an option as well. Quinn isn't a boutique, but good for substantive experience, although the firm has a sweatshop reputation.

To get a rough proxy for how different firms stack up against each other, go through the associates' profiles and compare their credentials. For better or worse (mostly worse), litigators are a preftige-oriented bunch and there's a reason why one office has all the clerks and another doesn't. For example, compare Gibbs & Brun's lineup to V&E's for example.

This is also another reason why Houston has so many high-end boutiques. As the Houston market became increasingly fixated on energy transactions, rainmaker litigators at the big firms felt like they were being sidelined by their corporate colleagues. Litigators are a proud bunch, and most of the top litigators left to found their own boutiques etc. Smyser was founded by Baker Botts parnters IIRC.

[Anonymous User]

So for someone pursuing a career in litigation in Houston, are all the boutiques going to better than the biglaw litigation groups? Understandably places like Susman are a notch above but that probably holds true when compared to most biglaw firms. What other boutiques would be better suited than the biglaw litigation groups in Houston?

Susman is several notches above. So is Gibbs & Bruns. Other good boutiques (a notch or two above) are Yetter, Reynolds, and Smyser. AZA isn't materially better than biglaw, but it's an option as well. Quinn isn't a boutique, but good for substantive experience, although the firm has a sweatshop reputation.

To get a rough proxy for how different firms stack up against each other, go through the associates' profiles and compare their credentials. For better or worse (mostly worse), litigators are a preftige-oriented bunch and there's a reason why one office has all the clerks and another doesn't. For example, compare Gibbs & Brun's lineup to V&E's for example.

This is also another reason why Houston has so many high-end boutiques. As the Houston market became increasingly fixated on energy transactions, rainmaker litigators at the big firms felt like they were being sidelined by their corporate colleagues. Litigators are a proud bunch, and most of the top litigators left to found their own boutiques etc. Smyser was founded by Baker Botts parnters IIRC.

Same anon. Forgot to mention Beck Redden and McKool, which are also good options. I'd put Beck at that second tier with Yetter and McKool at the AZA and Quinn tier.