LA - Susman v. Hueston Hennigan v. Munger v. Gibson Forum

[lllllllIllllIlllllll]

My priorities are: 1. early substantive experience and responsibility; 2. trials; 3. collegial, family-friendly firm; and 4. to the greatest extent possible, not getting up-and-outed if I turn out to be mediocre at biz dev.

[Anonymous User]

My priorities are: 1. early substantive experience and responsibility; 2. trials; 3. collegial, family-friendly firm; and 4. to the greatest extent possible, not getting up-and-outed if I turn out to be mediocre at biz dev.

bump

[Anonymous User]

My priorities are: 1. early substantive experience and responsibility; 2. trials; 3. collegial, family-friendly firm; and 4. to the greatest extent possible, not getting up-and-outed if I turn out to be mediocre at biz dev.

1. Responsibility: SG > HH/MTO > GDC. At SG you will be thrown in the deep end and may be the only attorney who has made an appearance on a matter. You'll have partners loosely keeping an eye on you, at a minimum, but you will be responsible. At GDC you are far more likely to be on a big team with one piece of the puzzle. Can't speak as well to HH and MTO, though both generally have small teams. HH has more associates, which could cut both ways.

2. Trials: SG/HH > MTO/GDC. This is a crapshoot no matter what; there are people who have been at SG and HH for some time who have never been to trial. But MTO and GDC do fewer trials per capita.

3. Collegial, family-friendly firm: MTO > GDC > HH > SG. There is nowhere more collegial than MTO, I don't think, and GDC is somewhere people stick around for the long haul if they're okay with the biglaw grind. From what I've heard, HH looks out for you a bit more than SG. People at SG get along well and will absolutely have your back if you ask, but it's "collegial" more in the "everyone parties together" sense than in the way that goes hand-in-hand with "family-friendly."

4. Not getting up-and-outed: hard to say, but I'd venture SG > HH > MTO > GDC. SG because it's very low leverage, and it's eat-what-you-kill so there's less incentive to push you out. On the other hand, you're less likely to hack it at SG than at the others, i.e., you might leave after eight months without anyone pushing you out. Maybe flip HH and MTO, because HH has significantly higher leverage; on the other hand, HH also has a lot of non-partner non-associate attorneys/of counsel. GDC is not the highest leverage firm, but it's still biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

4. Not getting up-and-outed: hard to say, but I'd venture SG > HH > MTO > GDC...GDC is not the highest leverage firm, but it's still biglaw.

Can't really speak to the others, but I will say that there isn't much of an up-or-out pressure at GDC, at least when compared to other biglaw shops. OP says she's concerned re bizdev; GDC makes of counsels left and right in part for that reason.

[Anonymous User]

Former HH associate here. HH is becoming more and more like BigLaw every year, but I think it’s still much closer to a firm like Susman than it is to Munger/GDC. Lots of early responsibility for associates. You will almost certainly be taking depos within a year or so. Good trial opportunities, including opportunities to take witnesses as a midlevel (or in some cases, even a junior).

Susman is a ton of hours, but also well above market pay. HH is a lot of hours, though I think noticeably less than Susman, but only slightly above market bonuses these days. Munger and GDC are both more normal BigLaw hours and normal BigLaw market pay.

[Anonymous User]

Former HH associate here. HH is becoming more and more like BigLaw every year, but I think it’s still much closer to a firm like Susman than it is to Munger/GDC. Lots of early responsibility for associates. You will almost certainly be taking depos within a year or so. Good trial opportunities, including opportunities to take witnesses as a midlevel (or in some cases, even a junior).

Susman is a ton of hours, but also well above market pay. HH is a lot of hours, though I think noticeably less than Susman, but only slightly above market bonuses these days. Munger and GDC are both more normal BigLaw hours and normal BigLaw market pay.

What can one expect to bill at HH? Specifically, juniors - midlevels?

[Anonymous User]

Current HH associate. Hard to know for sure, but I would guess the mean/median is in the 2000-2200 range.

[Anonymous User]

LA biglaw partner. I generally think MTO is the right choice given your priorities. You will have significantly better work-life balance than you will at SG and HH, significantly better training and substantive opportunities than you will at GDC, and a culture that - at least for a lot of people - is very friendly and collegial. I don't work there, but I am also told that MTO has an on-site childcare program that is really top-notch. MTO has some issues that make it a less attractive place to be a partner than many other firms, but you don't have to work there forever and you should have no problem moving to another firm that's a better platform for you and your practice down the road.

[lllllllIllllIlllllll]

Thanks for your answers, everyone

[Anonymous User]

Former HH associate here. HH is becoming more and more like BigLaw every year, but I think it’s still much closer to a firm like Susman than it is to Munger/GDC. Lots of early responsibility for associates. You will almost certainly be taking depos within a year or so. Good trial opportunities, including opportunities to take witnesses as a midlevel (or in some cases, even a junior).

Susman is a ton of hours, but also well above market pay. HH is a lot of hours, though I think noticeably less than Susman, but only slightly above market bonuses these days. Munger and GDC are both more normal BigLaw hours and normal BigLaw market pay.

If a clerk is looking for somewhere more like the old HH, any thoughts on which boutiques to target? There are a few in LA, but difficult to get a real read on them based off their websites.