Top Plaintiffs' Firms? Forum

[anon168]

Current associates at top plaintiffs firms - how much are you apart of potential case investigations? If anyone can go over how to bring in potential class suits here, or pm me, that'd be great. Primarily concerned with defects and consumer fraud. Do you just monitor the news and keep an ear out for any potential suits? I'd love to be able to bring in more than I make in the first few years and want to know the best way to do that.

On the consumer/product defect/mass tort side of class actions, you either send out spam-like solicitations (like Faruqi & Faruqi or Girardi & Keese), or you build a brand-name (like motley rice, or Lieff Cabraser), or you do both (like Girardi & Keese).

Either way, you've got to hustle. Just like with everything in law, as well as life.

Whether and to what extent an associate will be part of the pre-lawsuit investigation, case work-up depends on the firm.

[FSCU25]

I just started at a midsized plaintiff's firm, its one of the biggest players in toxic tort nationwide (especially asbestos cases).

Although the base pay isnt biglaw by any means, the bonuses can be quite substantial (one of the partners has gotten over 100 million for his clients in the past decade or so).

The work is great, I get to do actual substantive work instead of paper/busy work. Although, money is quite important, the attorneys all really want to help out their clients (most of whom are going to die), I think its sort of a self selecting thing, the people who do plaintiff's work all want to work with the "little guy."

Another huge benefit: No one in the office stays past 5 (usually). If you have any questions ask away.

I realize this was posted awhile ago, but how did you get this position and were you straight out of law school?

[Anonymous User]

I just started at a midsized plaintiff's firm, its one of the biggest players in toxic tort nationwide (especially asbestos cases).

Although the base pay isnt biglaw by any means, the bonuses can be quite substantial (one of the partners has gotten over 100 million for his clients in the past decade or so).

The work is great, I get to do actual substantive work instead of paper/busy work. Although, money is quite important, the attorneys all really want to help out their clients (most of whom are going to die), I think its sort of a self selecting thing, the people who do plaintiff's work all want to work with the "little guy."

Another huge benefit: No one in the office stays past 5 (usually). If you have any questions ask away.

I realize this was posted awhile ago, but how did you get this position and were you straight out of law school?

In general, do plaintiffs' firms hire people who come from big law/defense firms? Is the training good enough? Do plaintiffs firms have an ideological aversion to big law refugees?

[anon168]

In general, do plaintiffs' firms hire people who come from big law/defense firms? Is the training good enough? Do plaintiffs firms have an ideological aversion to big law refugees?

To take your questions in order.

Yes
Yes
No

[beach_terror]

Halliburton cert ... shudders

[Anonymous User]

i have a phone interview with Hagens Berman coming up. i believe i'm going to be speaking with HR. anyone know what i should expect or prepare for? my background, if it helps-current biglaw associate, former district court clerk. thanks in advance.

[anon168]

i have a phone interview with Hagens Berman coming up. i believe i'm going to be speaking with HR. anyone know what i should expect or prepare for? my background, if it helps-current biglaw associate, former district court clerk. thanks in advance.

Nothing too out of the ordinary especially if it's just with someone HR. The usual caveats would apply - eg know your resume, background, basic questions like why HB or why plaintiffs work.

Good luck.

[Anonymous User]

Anybody know anything about Kessler, Topaz, Meltzer & Check?

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Anybody know anything about Kessler, Topaz, Meltzer & Check?

I'm at a peer firm in one of their markets and I've heard less than stellar things. Lots of turn over, lower salaries and some strong personalities. Which office are you looking at?

[Anonymous User]

Their Radnor office. I've narrowed my decision down to them and Saltz Mongeluzzi. I know it's different type of law, but I'm looking for some combination of substantial work, decent pay and quality of life.

Since your from the market, do you have any opinion about one of these firms versus the other? And if you'd rather not post here could you PM

[Anonymous User]

Post without going anon and I will.

[Frm312]

Ok, I'm the poster from above. Thanks in advance

[Anonymous User]

.

[anon333]

I'm a current Biglaw associate, from a top school, cum laude, no clerkship. I don't really care about practice area that much, I just like litigation. I'd like to get a lot of on-your-feet/depo experience, if not trial experience. I'm somewhat concerned about Halliburton, and the fact that I'll probably never do a trial as a securities class-action lawyer, but can live with both, and would do securities class-action. And I'm interested in DC/NY (but don't have NY bar). Money is somewhat important, but good experience and fit much more so. Given all this, does anyone have comments about the following firms, or have suggestions for other firms I should be looking at? Also, I'm guessing most of these firms do not use recruiters, correct?

Cohen Milstein
Hausfield
Edwards Kirby
Lieff
Milberg
Labaton
Bernstein Litowitz
Seeger Weiss
Sanford Heisler
Altshuler (I'm interested, and would contemplate the moving to SF for the job, but recognize I'm probably not qualified, given no clerkship).

Thanks in advance.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a current Biglaw associate, from a top school, cum laude, no clerkship. I don't really care about practice area that much, I just like litigation. I'd like to get a lot of on-your-feet/depo experience, if not trial experience. I'm somewhat concerned about Halliburton, and the fact that I'll probably never do a trial as a securities class-action lawyer, but can live with both, and would do securities class-action. And I'm interested in DC/NY (but don't have NY bar). Money is somewhat important, but good experience and fit much more so. Given all this, does anyone have comments about the following firms, or have suggestions for other firms I should be looking at? Also, I'm guessing most of these firms do not use recruiters, correct?

Cohen Milstein
Hausfield
Edwards Kirby
Lieff
Milberg
Labaton
Bernstein Litowitz
Seeger Weiss
Sanford Heisler
Altshuler (I'm interested, and would contemplate the moving to SF for the job, but recognize I'm probably not qualified, given no clerkship).

Thanks in advance.

You should definitely add Robbins Geller, Wolf Haldenstein, and Grant & Eisenhofer to this list. Otherwise it looks good, minus Milberg. While it is still a name brand, it has been on the decline (and Robbins Geller, which was essentially a spinoff of Milberg, is far superior imho) . Also, here, have this: http://www.impactlitigation.com/wp-cont ... CAS-50.pdf

[Anonymous User]

What're the best firms for products liability? I'm ideally looking for one with a midwest office (Chicago, Milwaukee, etc).

[anon333]

I'm a current Biglaw associate, from a top school, cum laude, no clerkship. I don't really care about practice area that much, I just like litigation. I'd like to get a lot of on-your-feet/depo experience, if not trial experience. I'm somewhat concerned about Halliburton, and the fact that I'll probably never do a trial as a securities class-action lawyer, but can live with both, and would do securities class-action. And I'm interested in DC/NY (but don't have NY bar). Money is somewhat important, but good experience and fit much more so. Given all this, does anyone have comments about the following firms, or have suggestions for other firms I should be looking at? Also, I'm guessing most of these firms do not use recruiters, correct?

Cohen Milstein
Hausfield
Edwards Kirby
Lieff
Milberg
Labaton
Bernstein Litowitz
Seeger Weiss
Sanford Heisler
Altshuler (I'm interested, and would contemplate the moving to SF for the job, but recognize I'm probably not qualified, given no clerkship).

Thanks in advance.

You should definitely add Robbins Geller, Wolf Haldenstein, and Grant & Eisenhofer to this list. Otherwise it looks good, minus Milberg. While it is still a name brand, it has been on the decline (and Robbins Geller, which was essentially a spinoff of Milberg, is far superior imho) . Also, here, have this: http://www.impactlitigation.com/wp-cont ... CAS-50.pdf

Thanks! What if I wanted to do trial work? What plaintiffs' side practice areas go to trial most frequently? And what firms should I be thinking about if I wanted to do that?

[anon168]

Thanks! What if I wanted to do trial work?

Work for the DA. It's Plaintiff's side and you'll be in trial aplenty.

What plaintiffs' side practice areas go to trial most frequently?

Run-of-the-mill, nondescript, small-scale personal injury lawyers (think auto accidents, slip/fall, med-mal).

And what firms should I be thinking about if I wanted to do that?

See above.

Most of the firms listed in your original list are class-action (either securities or mass tort) type firms that rarely do trial work. The last class action securities case that actually when to verdict that I can recall off the top of my head was the Household case. Many cases survive MSJ, and even seat a jury, but few actually go through the motions, much less submit the case to a jury.

The numbers might be different if you include arbitrations, but then you're talking about arbitration. Arbitration!

[anon168]

What're the best firms for products liability? I'm ideally looking for one with a midwest office (Chicago, Milwaukee, etc).

I'm not going to sit here and run down every single products liability firm that I think is worthwhile.

If you don't want to post it anon, feel free to PM me.

[anon333]

The numbers might be different if you include arbitrations, but then you're talking about arbitration. Arbitration!

Thanks anon168, really appreciate your contributions here. Why do you say "Arbitration!"?

This has been touched on here, but I don't think I saw an answer--if one doesn't make partner at, say, Labaton/Lieff/Cohen, what are one's options? Opening your own shop is one, I imagine. I suppose it also depends on the practice area.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a current Biglaw associate, from a top school, cum laude, no clerkship. I don't really care about practice area that much, I just like litigation. I'd like to get a lot of on-your-feet/depo experience, if not trial experience. I'm somewhat concerned about Halliburton, and the fact that I'll probably never do a trial as a securities class-action lawyer, but can live with both, and would do securities class-action. And I'm interested in DC/NY (but don't have NY bar). Money is somewhat important, but good experience and fit much more so. Given all this, does anyone have comments about the following firms, or have suggestions for other firms I should be looking at? Also, I'm guessing most of these firms do not use recruiters, correct?

Cohen Milstein
Hausfield
Edwards Kirby
Lieff
Milberg
Labaton
Bernstein Litowitz
Seeger Weiss
Sanford Heisler
Altshuler (I'm interested, and would contemplate the moving to SF for the job, but recognize I'm probably not qualified, given no clerkship).

Thanks in advance.

You should definitely add Robbins Geller, Wolf Haldenstein, and Grant & Eisenhofer to this list. Otherwise it looks good, minus Milberg. While it is still a name brand, it has been on the decline (and Robbins Geller, which was essentially a spinoff of Milberg, is far superior imho) . Also, here, have this: http://www.impactlitigation.com/wp-cont ... CAS-50.pdf

I would also add Bernstein Liebhard and Scott+Scott. I have heard some good things about Bernstein Liebhard. They appear to have been primarily focused on securities up until a couple of years ago. Now they seem to be more diversified doing some anti-trust and mass torts. Scott+Scott is relatively new, but is growing and is also heavily involved in securities and anti-trust cases.

Also, I wouldn't let Halliburton worry you. First, it doesn't seem likely that Roberts is going to vote to overturn Basic. Second, even if the Court did overturn Basic it would probably end up benefiting plaintiffs firms. The top securities firms represent pension funds (which generally represent ~50% of damages in securities cases) that would just sue individually. All of the cases would get consolidated, and there would be no need to get a class certified. It will end up looking like the current mass tort system with bellwether trials. But, as I said earlier don't bet on Basic getting overturned.

[anon168]

The numbers might be different if you include arbitrations, but then you're talking about arbitration. Arbitration!

Thanks anon168, really appreciate your contributions here. Why do you say "Arbitration!"?

This has been touched on here, but I don't think I saw an answer--if one doesn't make partner at, say, Labaton/Lieff/Cohen, what are one's options? Opening your own shop is one, I imagine. I suppose it also depends on the practice area.

Because arbitration, aside from giving the term "corrupt legal system" a whole new meaning, is about as similar to a court trial as playing with Hot Wheels is to getting behind the wheel of a McLaren P1 at the Nürburgring. In fact, I think law school mock trials have more substantive benefit than arbitrations.

As to your other question re: partnership, the answer generally is "nothing." Unlike biglaw, many (if not most) plaintiffs' shops are not up-and-out. Partnership tracks -- if there is such a thing at many of these firms -- can be long and undefined. And even when you do make partner, you're income and when the term "partner cum associate" was coined, it was coined for these folks. In other words, many many plaintiffs shops have just a select few of true equity partners. Even big shops like BLBG, RGRD, Labaton, etc., there are just a handful of partners that (1) have true skin in the game and (2) call all the shots. So there's really no rush on the firm's part to make you partner, and from the associates' perspective there's less systemic pressure to do so.

[anon333]

Because arbitration, aside from giving the term "corrupt legal system" a whole new meaning, is about as similar to a court trial as playing with Hot Wheels is to getting behind the wheel of a McLaren P1 at the Nürburgring. In fact, I think law school mock trials have more substantive benefit than arbitrations.

As to your other question re: partnership, the answer generally is "nothing." Unlike biglaw, many (if not most) plaintiffs' shops are not up-and-out. Partnership tracks -- if there is such a thing at many of these firms -- can be long and undefined. And even when you do make partner, you're income and when the term "partner cum associate" was coined, it was coined for these folks. In other words, many many plaintiffs shops have just a select few of true equity partners. Even big shops like BLBG, RGRD, Labaton, etc., there are just a handful of partners that (1) have true skin in the game and (2) call all the shots. So there's really no rush on the firm's part to make you partner, and from the associates' perspective there's less systemic pressure to do so.

Thanks anon168. I have a lateral offer from one of these firms doing mainly securities class action, as well as from some excellent biglaw firms. I'm leaning strongly (90%) towards the plaintiffs firm, for the reasons people have been discussing in this thread, and especially for the change in mindset. I'm just a plaintiffs' lawyer at heart I guess. And I don't ever want to spend 20 minutes debating punctuation in responses to requests for admissions ever again.

But I'm worried I am being overly influenced by the current state of suck I find myself in (responding to a huge amount of discovery today in fact), and am therefore putting the plaintiffs firm on a pedestal/short shrifting the excellent biglaw firms I have lateral offers from. I mean, I have had some awesome biglaw experiences as well (first-chair depos, trial prep, working with experts, etc.) But my current thinking is, if I take one of the biglaw offers, I will find myself in similar states of suck not infrequently in the future, while if I take the plaintiffs firm offer, I will almost never find myself in a similar state of suck. Am I even right about this? Plus, the biglaw route preserves more options down the road, hence my question about partnership/exit opps at plaintiffs firms. Do you have any thoughts?

Also, can I PM you questions about the specific firm?

Thanks again. Would buy you a beer if I could.

[anon168]

Also, can I PM you questions about the specific firm?

Yes, of course.