first

First to say, don't go to Vinson Elkins if you're a litigator.

Double Boo.

Why is Munger so low? Prejudice against California firms? I thought they were extremely selective in hiring.

2 - I beat you (#1)

For the uninitiated

TTT = ANY law school below T14. So technically, UCLA, Vanderbilt, and Texas are all TTTs.

TTT = ANY legal job that isn't BIGLAW, a federal district court clerkship, a federal govt legal job, a state supreme court clerkship, or a prestigious boutique

For the uninitiated

TTT = ANY law school below T14. So technically, UCLA, Vanderbilt, and Texas are all TTTs.

TTT = ANY legal job that isn't BIGLAW, a federal district court clerkship, a federal govt legal job, a state supreme court clerkship, or a prestigious boutique

Is it just me or is this list as impressive (if not more impressive than) the 41-50 list?

Also add:

TTT = Any poster who double posts in a comment about TTT schools and jobs.

why no V&E for litigation??

v&e should be higher than BB. Consistently has higher RPL and midlevel satisfaction, and usually higher PPP. What else is there?

I've heard that Goodwin is on the rise. Am i taking crazy pills?

a kid from my school (which was not Top 25) got a job at F&R and was bottom 10% of the class.

Munger is extremely selective. They're also a relatively small firm (by biglaw standards) with no offices outside California that a lot of people haven't heard of. If you go there, you'll have to weigh the low associate to partner ratio and better work environment for young associates against the possibility that some of your classmates may be less impressed than if you went to Skadden.

9, I think you're right. Several (although not all) of these firms seem like they should be ranked better, especially in light of the previous listing.

14: was it a guy from your high school?

Cooley no-offered 3 out of 13 of their SF summer class.

I'm a 2L that wants to be a litigator. I have an interview at Dechert and Morgan Lews - any comments/suggestions?

Munger and Irell should be ranked higher.

TTT dates back well before AutoAdmit. The term was well established on law school forums back in 2000-01.

15: wrong. Most law students know that firms like Irell and MTO are extremely selective, and, by extension, extremely prestigious. If they don't, then they probably haven't done enough research for a worthwhile opinion.

15 - The fact you make career decisions based on what may or may not impress some of your law school classmates is why you will always have a TTT career.

Irell or Munger if you want to do patent lit? Irell is probably stronger in IP lit, but Munger is just more prestigious overall and seems like a better place to work (4-7 year partnership track, higher chance of partnership)

Pillsbury is circling the drain.

23- Did you miss the sarcasm in that post, or are you also being sarcastic in some kind of bizarre hyper-ironic circle that is destined to make my head explode?

12 sounds like a petty, bitter v&e lawyer.

Jenner is brutal

15 - sorry about your TTT. At any reasonable school, students know that Munger is a HELL OF A LOT more impressive than Skadden.

Do students at elite schools even interview at Skadden? It's always seemed like a place for lower first-tier strivers.

There are 4 on this list that are more highly regarded, at least at my school: Munger, Irell, Jenner, and Fish.

29: people at T6s aren't always familiar with Susman Godfrey. And those are some of the most prestigious schools in the country.

Vault's domination of student consciousness is an embarrassment. The world would be a better place if people didn't automatically regard McKinsey as the best for MC, Pricewaterhouse for Accounting, and Wachtell/Cravath for Law. There are many places that do excellent work.

Didn't know Cooley and V&E were still around. Oh, and don't get used to being so highly rated, Dechert.

how's f&r's corporate dept?

A&B eats K&S's lunch! K&S drops and A&B gains -- get used to it!

K&S is a sweatshop with miserable, grind-it-out associates, while A&B associates actually enjoy their lives. Not surprising the firms' prestige is starting to reflect this fact.

V&E is, at least in Houston (and I understand firm wide) is shutting down its litigation group for the most part. It has taken the position that it wants to focus on transactional work. I also understand it's trying to re-tool itself as a New York centric firm and so has shipped a number of its people up there.

Between Dechert and Morgan Lewis, take Morgan Lewis. It's doing better overall, and is committed to its litigation group.

Is it just me or is this list as impressive (if not more impressive than) the 41-50 list?
__________________________________________

It's just you.

28, care to explain?

Other thoughts on Jenner?

36 is an idiot.

Dechert is doing better than Morgan Lewis. Dechert has had some angry posters on ATL all year, so don't rely upon what you hear here. Do some research of your own, and ignore the ignorant junior associates, HR trolls and disgruntled associates.

WTF? We don't get cookies.

Actually, the "TTT" originated on the Princeton Review forum in the late 90s. The board is nothing like it used to be. An NYU law grad named Josh used to moderate it.

Agree with #36 - Morgan Lewis > Dechert in most areas.

A&B are the real "Kings" of ATL! They are the Real Peachtree Powerhouses.

39: That Dechert has so many disgruntled associates posting on ATL might give some insight as to whether a law student should go there.

When discussing Jenner, it is helpful to distinguish the DC office from other offices. As I understand it, Jenner essentially took over a small appellate practice to create its DC office. Though the office has grown substantially and absorbed more of the corporate culture, it is still a unique experience. Some of the partners do really impressive civil rights and liberties litigation, there is a fair amount of Supreme Court litigation work, and the office is small enough that associates can get some pretty cool assignments if they wish. That said, it's still BigLaw, so one shouldn't overstate how cuddly the firm is. It's ultimately about profitability after all.

35--V&E is "shutting down it's litigation group"? Really? That seems incredibly unlikely for a firm that is trying to grow its national rep. At the very least, your comment appears to be incredibly overblown.

35--V&E is "shutting down it's litigation group"? Really? That seems incredibly unlikely for a firm that is trying to grow its national rep. At the very least, your comment appears to be incredibly overblown.

46/47: It may seem overblown, but that is exactly what is happening here in Houston. People are leaving left and right, including partners, and are being asked to do so. From what people tell me, they are going to keep a small group around to handle certain cases for firm clients, but it will no longer be a major group within the firm.

If only Alston & Bird and Fish & Richardson could merge and be Fish & Bird or Bird & Fish...

The attorney dining room cookies at A&B are excellent. I've had the Pillsbury cookies, they are, as their firm, on the way out a pooper.

MTO and Irell are outstanding firms and are substantially underrated in Vault every year. This is likely due to only have Cali offices and being relatively small by BigLaw standards.

MTO is probably the most selective Vault 100 firm other than WLRK. Even though summer associate positions are very difficult to get, a significant number of summer associates do not get offers to become full time associates.

Irell has great IP litigation and Chu is on everyone's IP all-star list.

14- I can tell you that is not true. There are pretty substantial hard-line grade cutoffs at F&R.

F&R is also consistently a top 20 firm for selectivity (see Vault).

The position very likely was for a "staff attorney"

Jenner (DC only!) and Munger are among the 5 most selective law firms that interview at Yale. Almost all of their summer associates come from Yale, Stanford or Harvard and the rest are former clerks or exceptional students at other law schools. This ranking system seems to be lacking something, and it certainly should distinguish between offices.

Any law student worth his weight in moxie knows that Munger will always wipe Cravath's ass. I feel bad for them.

39
To follow up on 44's point- In the midlevel associates survey in the latest issue of the American Lawyer, Dechert's national rank is 2 or 3 spots above CWT, which is dead last among over 150 firms. Dechert is ranked 80th of 81 firms in New York. CWT is ranked 81st. Like any firm, there are bad apples, disgruntled associates, etc. But Dechert consistently ranks poorly in associate satisfaction and that is significant to law students decinding where they want to start their career. Amlaw rankings are significant enough that firms certainly play up any accolades they receive its pages. It's not intellectually honest to discount poor rankings as the ravings of disgruntled associates and malcontents.

52, I agree with you in the respect that I would be really surprised to find out that someone in the bottom 10% of their class got a job, but F&R is mostly listed as being selective because they have a strict undergraduate degree requirement. F&R requires that their attorneys practicing patent law have a technical degree. The firm is also heavily slanted toward people with technical degrees for patent litigation as well.

I heard Pillsbury no-offered 3/7 summers in Houston. My friend, who clerked there, said she dreaded coming into work.

Thoughts on Goodwin Procter NY?

Something smells fishy in here.

Whatevs. MTO's website is TTT.

You're mistaken about v&e. The folks leaving Houston and elsewhere are from the healthcare and int'l trade groups -- groups that V&E deliberately pushed out b/c they weren't consistent w/ their strategy. But getting rid of healthcare and int'l trade does NOT equate to getting rid of litigation! There is so much misinformation on this board, it's ridiculous.

I have an interview at Dechert's Bratislava office. What percentage of that office's work is complex, cross-border transactions?

62-
Unfortunately, Dechert's Bratislava office only does bet the company litigation and emphasizes lean staffing of no more than one hundred associates, immediate family, inlaws and people the associates dated in highschool on each matter to add the most value for its clients.

These pretzels are making me thirsty !

If its between Morgan Lewis and Dechert, I would - and did - choose Morgan Lewis. As one said earlier, Morgan Lewis is doing very good right now, whereas that may not be the same at Dechert (at least according to some I know). I think Morgan Lewis has better non-Philly offices (which can help to bring in more national business), has a better culture, and their business is doing fine during the bad times.

However, if you want to base doing great on nothing but PPP, go to Dechert - and you can also go to CWT. Keep in mind, there PPP #'s were from 2007 - and I will be curious to see which firm's profitability goes up.

If you are deciding between Dechert and Morgan, GET THE HELL OUT OF PHILADELPHIA. Otherwise, choose Morgan. Little known fact is, bonus on, they pay better at all levels. And Dechert PPP, if you are watching that, will dive very sharply this year. Oh, and they are in West Philly.

I echo 65's comments about Morgan's non-Philadelphia offices. It has a strong presence in D.C., California, and now Texas. I am not all that familiar with the New York office, though it seems to have a very strong presence there as well.

I call BS on the V&E is closing their litigation practice in Houston.

They had healthcare departures a while back, but their nalp page lists litigation/appellate/insolvency at 90 lawyers, and they are ranked band 1 by Chambers in both litigation and appellate litigation in Texas. http://www.chambersandpartners.com/usa/rankings36.aspx?fid=3666&solbar=1

If you want to do lit do Morgan, Dechert is a much better place to do transactional work.

I call BS on the V&E is closing their litigation practice in Houston.

They had healthcare departures a while back, but their nalp page lists litigation/appellate/insolvency at 90 lawyers, and they are ranked band 1 by Chambers in both litigation and appellate litigation in Texas. http://www.chambersandpartners.com/usa/rankings36.aspx?fid=3666&solbar=1

Wild Boar!

Anyone have anything on Goodwin Proctor Boston? I have an interview with them coming up.

70: great, then go there. But, you will have no difficulty finding a host of litigation associates and partners all over town who were forced out. NALP forms are probably not the safest source of unbiased information. And, you can be ranked highly in chambers without deciding litigation is going to be/remain a staple of your firm's practice. If you really think the health law section was the only one they pushed out, you are very mistaken.

Dechert treats its Associates like dirt.- low bonuses, poor partnership prospects, no transparency.

Although, I hear that it is a great firm to work at if you went to HLS with Bart Winnokur in 1953.

I do not know what the other Philly firms are like, but I would avoid Dechert if any others look decent.

One thing worth mentioning in this thread is that Irell is the only non-NY based firm that consistently exceeds NY market. Yep, exceeds it, not matches it. When NY bonuses are announced Irell adds an extra $2.5 or $5K just for good measure. Aside from Wachtell, Susman, & Kirkland, this basically puts them at the top of the heap for compensation, and puts them way ahead of all other LA-based firms.

Dechert serves stale cookies.

I call BS on the V&E thread. That firm isn't going to "undiversify" itself. Why get rid of a profitable practice that makes your firm less susceptible to the cyclical nature of transactional work?

The ex-VE lawyers milling around Houston probably got fed some story to sugarcoat the fact that the firm didn't want to keep those particular individuals.

77: Because McKinsey told you that in so doing -- by cutting your firm size in half -- you set up yourself up for a merger with a NY-based Biglaw litigation powerhouse. Then, V&E can continue to charge NY rates. Also, and especially in post-tort reform Texas, litigation sucks where you're limited to $250k punitive; this adds to V&E's PPP.

why did Cooley no offer 1/4 of its class?

Uh 78, that must have been one hell of a McKinsey report. Wait, all we have to do is cut our firm in half? Where do we sign? What firm wants to cut itself in half? That would make for an interesting partnership meeting. Not to mention, V&E is heavy in one of the only markets right now that is doing well (Energy), and the firm is growing a number of its more profitable practice groups. Look, you may be a bitter ex-associate, but that is a ridiculous.

Jenner's compensation is not lockstep and below market - no matter what anyone says. On the inside, this much is admitted. Management's counter is that it's not lockstep anywhere - that most firms claim they are lockstep and then exercise their discretion to pay some people market and some people less. This is clearly wrong.

The result is that associates who are hired under the guise of receiving certain "market" pay, may or may not receive that pay - even if they are doing good work! Similar to firm layoffs, you can always find a way to say "x" high is not high enough. I have several friends at Jenner who are presently paid below market, despite the fact their reviews have been good. This practice is disengenuous.

80: 78 is merely recounting the reality. And, Fulbright is starting to follow suit (though to a lesser extent). You may have a good point, but that doesn't mean VE is taking that approach. But, it is accurate that VE is incredibly profitable and having huge years lately. The litigation group just is unable to keep up and their partners were told to raise rates or get out...the clients wouldn't bear it and so it was a defacto push out of partners.

Jenner is ALL about profitability now, although the firm's ability to maintain profits is in serious question for a lot of reasons. They have a lot of money tied up in their new Chicago office building under construction, which has drastically limited their ability to cope with the litigation slowdown. And make no mistake, the firm is quite slow right now, especially in litigation. Associates are being hounded about their hours even though there flat out isn't enough work to keep them busy, and several associates have been quietly fired for not billing enough hours. In addition, the firm has too many partners and not enough rainmakers because the traditional rainmakers, all getting up there in age, have kept a pretty tight hold on business, so there aren't enough younger rainmaker partners to fill the void that's going to emerge sooner or later when the old guard retires. Two related notes: more than 10 partners have been de-equitized each year for the last two years because they weren't "profitable" enough (and the firm gave up some serious talent both times), and hardly any senior associates are making partner now. Instead, they're being told they don't fit with the firm's long-term plans, even though the firm doesn't seem to know what its long-term plans are, and certainly doesn't share them with associates (or much else, for that matter -- associates found out about the firm's new managing partner thanks to a story in the Chicago Tribune). Query whether all of these moves will help the firm survive or just make the firm's remaining attorneys miserable.

I think all of my class at PWSP NYC got offers. But no start dates.

I'm a present Jenner associate. 81 and 83 are spot-on.

Do the V5 associates socialize?
Anyone here works at one of the V5 firms?

Jenner is ALL about profitability now, although the firm's ability to maintain profits is in serious question for a lot of reasons. They have a lot of money tied up in their new Chicago office building under construction, which has drastically limited their ability to cope with the litigation slowdown. And make no mistake, the firm is quite slow right now, especially in litigation. Associates are being hounded about their hours even though there flat out isn't enough work to keep them busy, and several associates have been quietly fired for not billing enough hours. In addition, the firm has too many partners and not enough rainmakers because the traditional rainmakers, all getting up there in age, have kept a pretty tight hold on business, so there aren't enough younger rainmaker partners to fill the void that's going to emerge sooner or later when the old guard retires. Two related notes: more than 10 partners have been de-equitized each year for the last two years because they weren't "profitable" enough (and the firm gave up some serious talent both times), and hardly any senior associates are making partner now. Instead, they're being told they don't fit with the firm's long-term plans, even though the firm doesn't seem to know what its long-term plans are, and certainly doesn't share them with associates (or much else, for that matter -- associates found out about the firm's new managing partner thanks to a story in the Chicago Tribune). Query whether all of these moves will help the firm survive or just make the firm's remaining attorneys miserable.

Dechert NY does not have a good record with promoting and mentoring women. There are very few female partners. There is an attempt to have a women's group, but it has no real effect.

Having been a summer at GP Boston, I believe that the firm is certainly on the rise. The managing partner is aggressively (and wisely) expanding the firm, poaching top-notch talent from other firms, and there was too much work to go around and not enough associates (as of this time last year). The economic malaise certainly has cut into at least this last point. In all, the firm has a relatively low billables requirement (1850, with no pro bono cap) and pays market (at least as to base salary, not sure about bonuses). I'm pretty pumped to be working there.

"As one said earlier, Morgan Lewis is doing very good right now, whereas that may not be the same at Dechert (at least according to some I know)."

And Dechert associates no good writing neither, though Morgan eats good cookies. Munch munch.

But seriously, there's a lot to be said for not taking the bar at all if you want to live in Philly.

90's post seriously made me LoL!

Let's have an ATL write-off! Instead of taking 5 seconds to write a quick post while at work, lets each focus on the quality of our writing, and write short quips when we see poor writing abilities!!!

90 is 'write' on! LOLOLOL! Spotting poor writing on ATL makes 90 the MAN!

Hey 91, did 90's post make you Laugh out Loud or laugh out loud? LOSER!!!!!!

92: we had a write-off and got a new EIC for ATL. Wasn't that enough for you?

93 - No. I spend my days on here on ATL waiting for one unsuspecting grammer - loser (Or, "Gloser") who, while hard at work, cluelessly writes a poorly written post.

Then .... BOOM!!!!

I hit him with a snarky remark. 90 did a phenomenal job. You see, people like 90 and myself are simple, really. We don't have friends, hobbies or a sense of security with oneself. But do you know what we do have? The ability to pounce on others with sharp wit on annonymous websites such as my favorite, ATL.

I want a 'snarky-comment' contest, and I want it now.

92 - you're an idiot. It was the reference to cookie-monster that was funny!

94: 93 here, and I can appreciate your perspective and take on 90's tack. I think you are spot on with him/her.

For what its worth (and you don't know me at all so you have no idea whether it's worth anything), I do think Goodwin Procter is on the rise. Strategic growth and all that. It's value is especially apparent in slow economic times.

#89- what department are you looking to work in at Goodwin Procter?

#98 -- Corp.

89 is right about last year. G&P has a ton of litigation work from the mortgage crisis (defending banks for shoddy loan practices) and will for the foreseeable future. good job security short term and opportunity for boni, so the firm is "on the rise" in that sense. but what happens when those companies disappear (unlikely to be a big problem so long as the BK trustee keeps paying the bills) or the work dries up (three years out, probably)? they're going to need to replace a huge revenue stream.

100:
(Cynically) Banks are always going to get sued over their loan practices, which (more cynically) will always be shady in new and interesting ways.
(Practically) A year ago, nobody was dealing with fallout from the mortgage crisis. That hadn't happend yet.

100 is right that revenue streams don't last forever. That's the point of finding a smart, well-managed firm. You want you firm to be able to take advantage of revenue opportunities without banking the future of the firm on unchanging economic circumstances. Look for smart diversification and thoughtful manangement, if possible. Does the firm have a plan? Can it adapt to changing economic circumstances?

Old Judge Elkins is turning in his grave right now.

The head of GP's San Francisco office is a former PWSP partner and both are notoriously TTT

Avoid bankruptcy at PIllsbury SF. Some jerks.

75 makes a good point. Irell's pay is top notch (and paid lockstep at 1900 hours). As others have mentioned - Irell and Munger should be much higher, as their selectivity is more on par with V5 firms.

35 (and follow up comments):

To perpetuate that V&E is closing up its litigation practice is absolute ridiculous. A few people have left, in the practice areas noted, but it's not indicative of a widespread epidemic. The rumors of the comments...

And V&E is attempting to retool as a "NY-centric" firm. They are really trying to (re)build their image as a national and international firm and what better way than to be a major player in NYC. If anything it's smart to move some key partners to NYC. The only real effect for the types of people perusing ATL is that their already slim chances of making partner just got a little slimmer.

Mark it down. V&E > BB, and in a few years, the pseudo-prestige laden rankings published by Vault will reflect as much.

Seriously, when are firms going to realize that trying to be a NY firm is usually exactly the wrong way to go?

I'm not a Munger recruiting person, but all I've heard are good things about the place. They are really selective. Most of the people there have clerked (many for SCOTUS). I have a couple of friends there too who love their work. It makes me sick and jealous. If you have an opportunity to go to Munger, go. Any fool knows that Munger owns Skadden.

88-
Dechert NY is indeed terrible at mentoring and promoting women. It also won't win any accolades for mentoring and promoting minorities. That office hardly has any minority partners and very few minority associates, even by biglaw standards. But in all fairness the firm treats most of its associates like crap with regard to mentoring and promotion. Dechert just seems to revel in it.

Number 50 is correct. The cookies at A+B are very good. But I was partial to mini pastry and sushi days.

57 - "your friend" is mistaken about Pillsbury Houston's offers. Everyone got one - although some of the 1Ls may not have been invited back next summer.

Ditto 107, though "V&E > BB" is a bit of a stretch. Though probably based on past achievement as much as current profitability (V&E and BB have very similar PPP numbers), the general opinion is typically that BB is the best big firm in the state.

Still, V&E is a powerhouse and you've got to love the aggressive way they recruit and pay talent; V&E is often the first firm to move in the market and quick to raise salaries.

It will be interesting to see if V&E moves to pay NY salaries across offices. If they do, Lat will want to cover the move as it will have far-reaching implications in TX.

Got an offer - no start date. Are start dates usually in the offer letter?

the biggest floppy=-haired fagatron homo i know works at dechert. it's a firm for guys whose girlfriends fuck other guys.

the biggest floppy=-haired fagatron homo i know works at dechert. it's a firm for guys whose girlfriends fuck other guys.

the biggest floppy-haired fagatron homo i know works at dechert. it's a firm for guys whose girlfriends fuck other guys.

the biggest floppy-haired fagatron homo i know works at dechert. it's a firm for guys whose girlfriends fuck other guys.

114 - pillsbury start dates are announced after offers are given

i heard pillsbury LA gave offers to its entire summer class

Droves of litigation associates and partners have left V&E. The litigation section put up one person for partner last year (held back seven others to make sure that one person made), and that person didn't make it. The number of litigation associates in the section has dropped by more than 50% in the last year. If this is all coincidence, I would be surprised. Seems to me that there is a concerted effort to reduce (not eliminate) the litigation section to only those specialties that are necessary to serve transactional clients or that demand rates that keep up with transactional rates, like international arbitration and IP.

Goodwin is clearly a rising firm. They have expanded strongly into West Coast markets and are making moves into Southeast Asia as well. Even with the current economy they took their biggest summer class ever, 33% larger than any other year. There are arguments generally that working outside the home office is disadvantageous but anyone trying to work in Boston should be focusing on Goodwin and Ropes.

as an attorney in houston, i will confirm the rumor going around town that VE is essentially saying goodbye to its litigation practice. it's not that it's going to go away overnight, but rather that the firm isn't going to work on growing it and doesn't care if it goes away. once the older established litigation partners retire/leave, it isn't going to replace them. as the originally poster noted, the rumor is that it is trying to rebrand itself as a corporate boutique. all this is of course is just rumors, but to an outside observer, the actions of the firm seem to confirm the rumors.

Any comments on Pillsbury's energy practice?

"It will be interesting to see if V&E moves to pay NY salaries across offices. If they do, Lat will want to cover the move as it will have far-reaching implications in TX."

113, they already did this last summer for the Houston office. V&E Houston pays 160K. Dunno what they did in other offices, so it's not firm-wide yet, but it already had it's TX effect.

Pillsbury has an excellent energy practice, mainly out of the DC and Houston office. DC does a lot of nuclear work, which is really coming back lately and the west coast handles legal work for Chevron, among others.

I am a rising second year work ing in NY interested in practicing soft IP exclusively. Any hope for me? Also, anybody have any insight on Patterson Belknap?

I am a rising second year work ing in NY interested in practicing soft IP exclusively. Any hope for me? Also, anybody have any insight on Patterson Belknap?

125 - V&E moved to 160k, but with very small bonuses. Major differences emerge after a year or two, though credit must be given to V&E for generously bumping the salaries.

I think Lat needs to do a write up on V&E. For a firm that wants to take over the BB mantle as best in the state, will a move to transactional-only really do it? Isn't this what Weil is doing, more or less, (although profitably) already?

Could someone please tell me what Pillsbury in NY is like? Happy people, good work?

Could someone please tell me what Pillsbury in NY is like? Happy people, good work?

Thoughts on Goodwin Procter NYC, esp for IP work

Ditto on the Pillsbury question. I've been hearing conflicting info, so insider insight is appreciated.

131: PWSP NYC was a good place to work. The atty recruiting Director is not that great, but if you can forgive that, the associates are great. Start dates will be announced some time in the new year. Heard all summers in NYC got offers.

I am a former V&E associate. It's a very high quality firm, but I'm curious to see how the expansion in NY works out. The NY market is competitive and it seems like some of the V&E higher-ups have underestimated how easy it is going to be to just "show up" in NY and start competing with more recognized firms and, frankly, with the stigma of being a Texas firm. I have worked in both TX and NY and the attitudes of some of the partners at V&E about competing in the NY market seemed naive, to say the least.

Pillsbury has a substantial and successful energy practice on both the East Coast and West Coast and in Houston. However, "Energy" is a broad practice description, and their expertise in certain aspects of energy law (e.g., finance, nuclear, LNG, and renewable) may be more substantial than others (e.g., domestic E&P).

I heard from a senior litigation associate in V&E's Houston office that they are reoganizing their practice sections and reducing their litigation practice to litigators in specialized practice areas that can demand higher fees and support V&E's other practice areas. He did not say what they've actually done to accomplish the reorganization.

I work in Cooley as an associate in the SF office. It's real unfortunate that they rejected 3 out of the 13 summers. They wanted a class of about 8 or 9 and panicked when so many accepted. So, they took it out on 3 of the summers. The douchebags that run the program promised all of the summers an equal chance, but that wasn't true. They have room in the litigation side but NOT on the corporate side - but they weren't honest about this. (of course, here they rejected 2 summers who were litigators). But, my point is they have been INSINCERE to the law students... beware!

PWSP - no offered one 1L, and no offered one 2L.

Can anyone comment on QOL at Pillsbury SF, Litigation. I also am interested in the bankruptcy comment. I heard there was one older partner, ex military, that was terrible but that he could be avoided.

What sorts of questions should a prospective summer associate at V&E's New York office be asking?

What sorts of questions should a prospective summer associate at V&E's New York office be asking?

What sorts of questions should a prospective summer associate at V&E's New York office be asking?

Any information on Vinson & Elkins in NY would be awesome.