Boies 2024 Forum

[Lawclerk2022]

May very well be a longshot, but anyone lurking on here able to give insight into how Boies is to work at currently? What are the personalities like of the remaining partners, etc. I really like plaintiff side work so am looking at Boies since that appears to be the vast majority of their remaining work. But would love any insight anyone here has.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The premise of your statement that a firm may drop off when it builds its "practice around one person" may be true, but using Susman as an example is downright counterfactual. Their PPP were through the roof last year. https://www.law.com/law-firm-profile/?i ... odfrey-LLP

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The premise of your statement that a firm may drop off when it builds its "practice around one person" may be true, but using Susman as an example is downright counterfactual. Their PPP were through the roof last year. https://www.law.com/law-firm-profile/?i ... odfrey-LLP

Agreed, Susman feels like the exception to the rule.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

Thank you! This was super helpful. I get a ton of substantive experience (relatively) at my biglaw firm so sounds like going to boies would actually be a massive downgrade

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The premise of your statement that a firm may drop off when it builds its "practice around one person" may be true, but using Susman as an example is downright counterfactual. Their PPP were through the roof last year. https://www.law.com/law-firm-profile/?i ... odfrey-LLP

Agreed, Susman feels like the exception to the rule.

How much of that was Dominion tho

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The premise of your statement that a firm may drop off when it builds its "practice around one person" may be true, but using Susman as an example is downright counterfactual. Their PPP were through the roof last year. https://www.law.com/law-firm-profile/?i ... odfrey-LLP

Agreed, Susman feels like the exception to the rule.

How much of that was Dominion tho

Not as much as you'd think.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The premise of your statement that a firm may drop off when it builds its "practice around one person" may be true, but using Susman as an example is downright counterfactual. Their PPP were through the roof last year. https://www.law.com/law-firm-profile/?i ... odfrey-LLP

Agreed, Susman feels like the exception to the rule.

How much of that was Dominion tho

PPE-wise sure, but I'm fairly certain Susman has cemented itself with a certain staying power that Boies does not yet have. The whole game with these firms is that there is a snowball effect, elite partners attract mre elite partners and associates and then you do this for long enough and boom you're a stable firm. If you're argument is that susman being in the top 5 most profitable firms is a one-off of Dominion then yeah probably. Nature of their work is probably also going to have larger up and downs I bet.

[Anonymous User]

Plaintiffs’ firms bob up and down the top 100 PPP ranks like a corks in rough water

[gingermilkman]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The line about very little substantive experience getting passed down the line is just false. My friend who is a second/third year there just did oral arguments on a summary judgement motion for a RICO class action defense case. Another associate I know there did Massachusetts Supreme Court arguments a couple months ago on her own. Maybe it is different in other offices, but in the New York office it seems like the associates get much more substantive experience than most BigLaw litigators.

[Anonymous User]

Anon for obvious reasons. I'll just say this: Boies remains one of the best litigation boutiques in the country. The partners all worked under David Boies and have quite literally learned from the best. Reports of the firm's declined are immensely exaggerated. The firm continues to get top of the line work.

Do you work there currently? And if so, can you provide a little more than a boilerplate review of the culture etc?

He absolutely works there. I'm not personally at Boies, but my best friend is and I work with them as co-counsel on a few cases. The firm has definitely dropped off significantly. They are still good lawyers for sure. But that's just how things work when you build your practice around one person (Susman has lost a step with Steve, WS depends on Beth, etc.). There's 0 doubt that they've dropped to anyone being objective.

Now, culturally, I think it really depends. They have some very toxic partners and some good ones. What cases you're staffed on plays a huge role in what your experience will be. The work they do is fine, and you'll likely get more experience than the huge NYC firms. However, partners there fight for any experience they can get and very little substantive/standup experience is passed down the ranks. At best, you might represent the firm at M&Cs but have no real decision-making authority. It always surprises me how the partners clamor to be first or second chair at relatively unimportant depos.

The line about very little substantive experience getting passed down the line is just false. My friend who is a second/third year there just did oral arguments on a summary judgement motion for a RICO class action defense case. Another associate I know there did Massachusetts Supreme Court arguments a couple months ago on her own. Maybe it is different in other offices, but in the New York office it seems like the associates get much more substantive experience than most BigLaw litigators.

Interesting to see if they can keep winning with this formula when the firm’s new associate hire quality is rapidly dropping. A 2d/3d year who graduated magna at a T14 coming off two substantive clerkships is not the same as a non-Latin-honors lower T14 grad who joined the firm immediately after graduation.

[Anonymous User]

Would have to agree with the above. Boies is a great firm, but it's not adapting well to the post Boies reality. As others have noted, boutiques tend to be less stable than their larger counterparts (Selendy Gay, Kaplan Hecker, Boies). They have other issues too, mostly due to their small size, like more grunt work per lawyer (especially because of no practice area specialists), not as strong corporate litigation because of no corporate departments sending work to the litigators, less formal training, etc. And the biggest shock of all to many young associates: few cases going to trial. As someone noted, Susman went to trial on average three times a year over the past decade

[Anonymous User]

Would have to agree with the above. Boies is a great firm, but it's not adapting well to the post Boies reality. As others have noted, boutiques tend to be less stable than their larger counterparts (Selendy Gay, Kaplan Hecker, Boies). They have other issues too, mostly due to their small size, like more grunt work per lawyer (especially because of no practice area specialists), not as strong corporate litigation because of no corporate departments sending work to the litigators, less formal training, etc. And the biggest shock of all to many young associates: few cases going to trial. As someone noted, Susman went to trial on average three times a year over the past decade

lmao pick any one of Susman’s top trial lawyers and that individual goes to trial three times a year or more. that stat is certainly underinclusive.

yes, associates at Susman (or any other civil trial boutique) will get less trial experience than AUSAs. but they will get substantially more in that line of work than any other practice pathway that exists. and even when cases settle, the associates at Susman and comparable firms will have racked up countless depos, oral arguments, and court appearances that their biglaw counterparts can only dream of.

there are tradeoffs, of course.

[Anonymous User]

Would have to agree with the above. Boies is a great firm, but it's not adapting well to the post Boies reality. As others have noted, boutiques tend to be less stable than their larger counterparts (Selendy Gay, Kaplan Hecker, Boies). They have other issues too, mostly due to their small size, like more grunt work per lawyer (especially because of no practice area specialists), not as strong corporate litigation because of no corporate departments sending work to the litigators, less formal training, etc. And the biggest shock of all to many young associates: few cases going to trial. As someone noted, Susman went to trial on average three times a year over the past decade

lmao pick any one of Susman’s top trial lawyers and that individual goes to trial three times a year or more. that stat is certainly underinclusive.

yes, associates at Susman (or any other civil trial boutique) will get less trial experience than AUSAs. but they will get substantially more in that line of work than any other practice pathway that exists. and even when cases settle, the associates at Susman and comparable firms will have racked up countless depos, oral arguments, and court appearances that their biglaw counterparts can only dream of.

there are tradeoffs, of course.

Nothing I said in my previous post was wrong. All of this is coming from publicly available information and databases. Several "biglaw" (whatever that term means, seeing that the top few NYC firms have less than 500 lawyers total) firms provide the kind of experience you're talking about. There's just less busy work because, while the practice groups are thinly staffed, there is an actual support team