LA Biglaw Forum

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have any insight regarding Simpson LA?
Also very interested in hearing what people have to say about Sheppard Mullin.

[Anonymous User]

One associate who used to work for a NYC V5 and now works at a top OC firm told me that face time requirements are way lower on the west coast in general. Not sure if he was just BSing me.

[Anonymous User]

For someone interested in entertainment law, are there better places than others to start (apart from the entertainment practice at O'Melveny)?
This will pretty significantly affect which firm I end up at.

[Anonymous User]

For someone interested in entertainment law, are there better places than others to start (apart from the entertainment practice at O'Melveny)?
This will pretty significantly affect which firm I end up at.

What kind of entertainment law do you want to practice? What kind of clients do you want to work with?

[Anonymous User]

For someone interested in entertainment law, are there better places than others to start (apart from the entertainment practice at O'Melveny)?
This will pretty significantly affect which firm I end up at.

What kind of entertainment law do you want to practice? What kind of clients do you want to work with?

Preferably music but would be open to film and TV as well. At these beginning stages I am unsure about whether I would prefer working for talent, studios/labels, or the financial side, but I could see myself being happy with all options. At this point I am most concerned with an initial break-in to the industry.

[Anonymous User]

For someone interested in entertainment law, are there better places than others to start (apart from the entertainment practice at O'Melveny)?
This will pretty significantly affect which firm I end up at.

What kind of entertainment law do you want to practice? What kind of clients do you want to work with?

I'll piggyback on this.

What if end goal is a small talent side firm like Bloom, Hergott

[Anonymous User]

Here are the stereotypes of several firms that have been asked about, from my personal perspective and scuttlebutt around the water cooler. Remember some of these firms have hundreds of attorneys, so these are wild generalizations at best. I'm being candid because I'm anon, so no I'm not going to tell you my credentials. Other attorneys please feel free to correct/amend/scream at my characterizations.

Latham: Fratty, friendly. Seems like they hang out with one another a lot, anecdotally most peoples' social lives revolve around their coworkers. For example, there is a Latham crowd at every happy hour on any given day. Can be a good or bad thing, depending on your personality. For what it's worth, I'd generally consider their Jr. associates the most attractive, followed closely by probably Gibson. If you were in a frat or sorority, you'll have an easy time fitting in here. It's a cool, young crowd. I hate this phrase, but Latham epitomizes "work hard play hard." For introverts, it can probably be an overwhelming lifestyle.

Gibson: Pleasant, bubbly, friendly, professional. My impression is it's less casual of an atmosphere than Latham. Friendly like Mr. Rogers is friendly, instead of Entourage friendly. Again, hot jr. associates. This is one of the few firms where you'd be hard-pressed to find an attorney complaining about the firm (beyond regular complaints about big law life in general), which is weird because their hours are just as bad if not worse than many other big firms. Their recruiting process is heavy on personality (but also grade/school snobs), I know some very qualified applicants who didn't get an SA there, my guess is because they were not outgoing/attractive. Almost seems like this firm hires future politicians, it's that kind of non-offensive charisma and easy-on-the-eyes type. In terms of social life, people seem to have their own lives. Associates do hang out with one another, but it's less firm-sponsored feeling than Latham, and more like small groups of friends who hang out and happen to work together.

OMM: I actually don't know any Jr. Associates, but I know on my callback, I left with the impression that they were kind of, well, dicks. I got a couple partners who gave me esoteric "hard ball" questions, and told me they just wanted to see how I handled myself under pressure. Other interviewees had similar experiences. Not my thing. Some posters have said this firm is going downhill, probably based on the steady stream of partners that appear to be jumping ship, but again I don't have personal knowledge. Could just be noise, this firm is probably one of the "entertainment-law" relevant big firms out here. It's a huge firm, I'd be pretty surprised if it folded.

Kirkland: Don't know a ton about Kirkland. People say the usual "friendly, professional." My impression is their SA program is really good at hiding the workload (unlike Gibson or Skadden). The actual attorneys I know there regularly complain about their hours. But I don't know if attorneys at the other firms just complain less, because I figure we all pretty much work the maximum tolerable hours a human can. The attorneys I know there are normal, friendly people. From what I gather, the culture there is pretty much, do your work, be nice to everyone, go home. Your personal life (insofar as you have one) is separate from your professional life, which can be a plus for some. It's also odd (as noted) that Kirkland just doesn't come up very much for whatever reason, obviously it's a nationally prestigious firm but it's just not that big of a deal in LA for whatever reason.

Paul Hastings: Fratty, bordering on douchey. Not in a disparaging way, this probably suits certain personalities more. Like talk a big game, depending on how you look at it, some may call it swagger, some may call it tacky. Think Ari Gold. The firm has its name in huge letters on top of their building, which is actually perfect for their culture. PH is not really perceived out here on the same "level" of "prestige" as Gibson, Latham, Skadden, if you care about that, but they seem to be getting pretty steady work. It's a polarizing culture.

Skadden: Yes, a woman died. Yes it was from overwork (on a Sunday afternoon in her home office). Not to divulge too many personal details, but she was notoriously overworked, took a vacation, was called back from it (this is why you always tell your partners you're backpacking in cambodia with no phone), and died from not sleeping/too many uppers in her early thirties. Does this speak to Skadden's culture specifically? Actually yes. But like someone else said, this can really happen anywhere, know your limits and know that this job isn't worth your life. Ok, soapbox aside, Skadden's culture IS one of crushing overwork. Seems the most NY-like firm out here. Associates have told summers to escape while they can, and I don't know if they were joking. The place has a gym with clothes and showers, which tells you how much you're supposed to be staying in there. Not to mention the office is pretty depressing. It's windowless and dark, I've heard it called "the Deathstar." All that aside, it's probably one of the more grade-selective big firms out here (the others being Gibson, MTO, Quinn, and Irell). It's obviously a huge national name. However, and I may catch flack for this, in LA it's not as big a deal as it is in NY, and I agree with the feeling out here that Vault rankings etc. have a heavy east coast bias. Seems like Latham, MTO, Gibson, and Irell are all (ancedotally) more desirable locations than Skadden. From an individual perspective, Skadden attorneys I know are relatively normal people, professional and polite. Just depressed, and in my personal opinion, everyone has a streak of competitive drive bubbling beneath the surface, the kind of secret "gunnerishness" type-A personality that is generally shunned (but still exists) in stereotypically "friendlier" places like Latham or Gibson. If you are honest with yourself about your personality and know that you have that intense competitive edge and don't mind working hard, Skadden may be the place for you.

MTO: Probably the most prestigious lit firm out here. I don't know that they will hire you without a federal clerkship. They get the most high-profile cases and do some pretty spectacular work. That said, the culture is as brainy as you would expect. Conversations outside of work time regularly involve discussing the latest Supreme Court opinions. If you truly love the law with every fiber of your being in a borderline sexual way, MTO may be for you (if you can get an offer). They are probably the biggest grade snobs in LA. On the negative side, they are also (in my, and my friends', opinions) the least physically attractive firm in LA. When a crowd of MTO lawyers stroll into what used to be Blue Cow, they are pretty easy to spot--not in a good way. Even within the brainiacs in the firm, I know some MTO attorneys who feel pressured to show they're smarter than everyone else. I have not heard this firm described as friendly. People talk about whose clerkship is more prestigious and who is published where. Basically, if you clerked, you probably fit in here. They are excellent lawyers.

Quinn: I don't have a great opinion of Quinn's culture, so take what I'm saying for the biased, uninformed speculation it is. I'll say that Quinn does top notch work, pays very well, and will open a lot of doors. That said, the culture is bizarre. They try to foster this new-age, silicon valley tech start up vibe, but I found the actual people they hire there and the professional atmosphere partners have created to be not that at all. I think the vibe they're going for is this Weezer-esque pop-punk nerd cool, but they've ended up with a lit boutique power house intense NY-style joyless firm, except everyone is in untucked polos and sandals. It's a little baffling to be honest. I couldn't shake the feeling that the coronas and flip flops during their "casual unstructured" interview process was just a paper-thin veneer. Not sure why they even go for this look, it's like putting colorful frosting on an onion bagel and calling it a doughnut. This place is incredibly grade and school selective, so being a Quinn attorney does carry weight in LA, much like MTO (MTO probably more so though).

Irell: The people here are very smart and competent. Again, they are relative grade/school snobs. It's a beautiful location with a nice office. Everyone is friendly once you get to know them, but, and again this is a huge generalization, people are more introverted than some of the other firms mentioned. In fact, many attorneys brag about their closed door policy. You can always knock and visit with other attorneys, but generally, people just work in their office with their doors closed unless they need to interact with coworkers for work. You get your stuff done and go home. The good news is there's very little face time requirement, and people don't constantly come bother you in your office with paint-drying stories about the last half-marathon they waddled. On the flip side, the culture can feel a bit cold and sterile if you're an extrovert.


In closing, let me reiterate that these are generalizations. Many of these firms are huge, and like any other group in life, there's going to be different personalities. If you work at one of these firms and I've insulted you, I didn't mean it personally but I also am not sorry (because of the shield of anon).


It's confusing to know who's who when posting anon (is there something I'm missing?) so you can direct any followup questions or insults to and I'll know you mean me.

[cookiejar1]

Quinn's description just made my day.

[hungryjumps]

Quinn: . . . it's like putting colorful frosting on an onion bagel and calling it a doughnut.

Amazing.

[09042014]

I don't get the quinn selectivity trolling. Don't they take anyone with good but not great grades.

[Anonymous User]

If you truly love the law with every fiber of your being in a borderline sexual way, MTO may be for you (if you can get an offer).

Holy hell, this made me lol very very hard.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have any experience with Manatt or their system of compensation?

[Yukos]

I am a recent grad and picked a firm very similar to MTO for similar reasons outlined here. My firm is also a firm in which associates could have worked anywhere. Many seem to now regret their choice. Be careful.

I have, without a doubt, gotten to do more interesting things than peers of my class year at biglaw. But there are also several reasons why I regret coming here. First, one of the problems with the "lean" staffing model of MTO and firms like is it that associates become indispensable and it becomes very difficult to take time off. Sure you can get coverage, and people won't tell you not to go -- but if something comes up, and you're the only one that knows shit, you're going to get a call and end up doing work. Consequently, I'm in the mid - high 2000s. Nobody would have said shit to me if I was at 1900, but it would not have been possible to meet my obligations working that little.

Second (and I say this with the caveat that my firm is smaller than MTO so it may be more of a problem here), but small(er) firms are extremely dependent on a few partners and those partners wield disproportionate influence. if those partners are assholes, the tone and culture of the firm can change very quickly.

Third, if you're not engaged in plaintiff-side work (e.g., Susman), litigation is typically less profitable than transactional work. As a consequence, salaries are typically below market starting with mid-level associates and going forward. Depending on the firm, the haircut may be extremely small or in the tens of thousands of dollars. In addition (also with the caveat that my firm is smaller than MTO), firms like this cut corners on overhead, so you won't find you have the same level of paralegal, IT, etc. support as you would at big firms. This can be very frustrating at times.

Finally, I see no advantage in exit ops due to working at an uber-selective firm - despite the fact that all of my coworkers went to top schools, got top grades, and clerked, and some of whom must have been competitive for Supreme Court clerkships based on their credentials. At this level, exit ops are really about connections through the partners and which ones are willing to go to bat for you. You should ask the current associates there about partners' attitudes towards helping their associates get new and good jobs.

Could you say the firm? You're anon.

[goden]

Should we be posting our LA bidlists and getting advice on them here or should we start another thread for that?

[Anonymous User]

Should we be posting our LA bidlists and getting advice on them here or should we start another thread for that?

Feel free to post them here.

[brotherdarkness]

.

[goden]

I made a thread specifically for LA OCI here: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=231504

[Anonymous User]

I am a recent grad and picked a firm very similar to MTO for similar reasons outlined here. My firm is also a firm in which associates could have worked anywhere. Many seem to now regret their choice. Be careful.

I have, without a doubt, gotten to do more interesting things than peers of my class year at biglaw. But there are also several reasons why I regret coming here. First, one of the problems with the "lean" staffing model of MTO and firms like is it that associates become indispensable and it becomes very difficult to take time off. Sure you can get coverage, and people won't tell you not to go -- but if something comes up, and you're the only one that knows shit, you're going to get a call and end up doing work. Consequently, I'm in the mid - high 2000s. Nobody would have said shit to me if I was at 1900, but it would not have been possible to meet my obligations working that little.

Second (and I say this with the caveat that my firm is smaller than MTO so it may be more of a problem here), but small(er) firms are extremely dependent on a few partners and those partners wield disproportionate influence. if those partners are assholes, the tone and culture of the firm can change very quickly.

Third, if you're not engaged in plaintiff-side work (e.g., Susman), litigation is typically less profitable than transactional work. As a consequence, salaries are typically below market starting with mid-level associates and going forward. Depending on the firm, the haircut may be extremely small or in the tens of thousands of dollars. In addition (also with the caveat that my firm is smaller than MTO), firms like this cut corners on overhead, so you won't find you have the same level of paralegal, IT, etc. support as you would at big firms. This can be very frustrating at times.

Finally, I see no advantage in exit ops due to working at an uber-selective firm - despite the fact that all of my coworkers went to top schools, got top grades, and clerked, and some of whom must have been competitive for Supreme Court clerkships based on their credentials. At this level, exit ops are really about connections through the partners and which ones are willing to go to bat for you. You should ask the current associates there about partners' attitudes towards helping their associates get new and good jobs.

Could you say the firm? You're anon.

He already said he's a recent grad and it's a pretty small firm. Could out himself if he tells you the firm.

But from what he's telling me, it sounds like Caldwell Leslie. I know a few people who work there and they've characterized it in a similar fashion.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone able to speak on the big differences between LA and smaller biglaw markets in SoCal like OC and SD? Particularly interested in whether or not there is a meaningful difference in work/life balance.

[Anonymous User]

2H 8P HLS. Ties to LA, and a good interviewer, but KJD. What are my chances at top firms and what are my target firms?

[Anonymous User]

2H 8P HLS. Ties to LA, and a good interviewer, but KJD. What are my chances at top firms and what are my target firms?

that's below median right? from anecdotal evidence, no chance at MTO/Irell, GDC might be out too, but Latham/OMM/Paul Hastings are probably targets

disregard if I was wrong about the below median

[Anonymous User]

2H 8P HLS. Ties to LA, and a good interviewer, but KJD. What are my chances at top firms and what are my target firms?

that's below median right? from anecdotal evidence, no chance at MTO/Irell, GDC might be out too, but Latham/OMM/Paul Hastings are probably targets

disregard if I was wrong about the below median

I believe median is 3-4 Hs. It allegedly changes from year to year. Regardless, yes, I'm slightly below. Anyone know if I have legitimate shots at Paul Hastings, OMM, Latham, MoFo, Kirkland, Skadden, Akin Gump, Proskauer, Milbank...? I would love v30 or so if possible, but I'm just trying to gauge my realistic chances prior to bidding.

[Anonymous User]

2H 8P HLS. Ties to LA, and a good interviewer, but KJD. What are my chances at top firms and what are my target firms?

that's below median right? from anecdotal evidence, no chance at MTO/Irell, GDC might be out too, but Latham/OMM/Paul Hastings are probably targets

disregard if I was wrong about the below median

I believe median is 3-4 Hs. It allegedly changes from year to year. Regardless, yes, I'm slightly below. Anyone know if I have legitimate shots at Paul Hastings, OMM, Latham, MoFo, Kirkland, Skadden, Akin Gump, Proskauer, Milbank...? I would love v30 or so if possible, but I'm just trying to gauge my realistic chances prior to bidding.

Obviously depends on your interview skills and softs, but I'd say you have a solid shot at PH, Mofo, Akin Gump, Proskauer, and Milbank.

[Anonymous User]

If you do a CB during the summer, do most firms generally notify you regarding an offer before or after OCI? Or is it completely different for each firm?

[Anonymous User]

Doesn't PH still no-offer a lot?