Susman vs. MTO Forum

[Anonymous User]

If you had offers on the West Coast from MTO and Susman, which one would you accept and why?

[Anonymous User]

They're very different. If you're asking as a prospective summer, try to do both, but maybe prioritize MTO if you don't have a clerkship lined up yet, since Susman's offers are contingent on satisfactorily completing one. If you're asking as a prospective post-clerkship hire, don't try too hard to make an objective comparison—it's more a matter of subjective fit. (And if you're the type who can't help but focus on objective comparisons rather than feel, then MTO may be a better fit.)

Reasons to pick MTO:

• Want to be a litigator, but not necessarily a trial lawyer.
• Appreciate a friendly and caring work culture.
• Prefer to bill 1900–2200 hours, rather than 2400–3000 hours.
• Liked law school classes/journal and want practice to be similar.
• Prioritize having a free-market assignment system.

Reasons to pick Susman:

• Certain you want to go all-in on trial practice.
• Get along with the personalities in the office, and are comfortable being yourself.
• Enjoy more of a work-hard play-hard culture.
• Want to do contingency work, and expect to do well in an eat-what-you-kill partnership.
• Liked law school clinics more than journal/moot court.

Also, you said "West Coast" but the differences between DTLA, Century City, SF, and Seattle are pretty substantial. The worst thing about MTO LA might be its location (both in terms of being pleasant and in terms of commute distance); it's also a substantially bigger office than any of the other three, which could matter more if you want to make the most of the free-market system or want the ability to hide out (a bit—it's still small).