Reasons for reading ATL vary from person to person. But we have been told by some people that one of the greatest benefits of following the site is gaining familiarity with law firms and the differences between them.
In that vein, we shall continue on with our series of open threads on the Vault 100. (Sorry, haters! Though we are taking under advisement the idea that we list them in groups of ten from this point forward.)
Here are the next five, with prestige scores in parentheses:
16. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP (7.056)
17. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (7.055)
18. White & Case LLP (7.054)
19. Shearman & Sterling LLP (7.043)
20. Arnold & Porter LLP (6.905)
Of the five, White & Case has the most bizarre list of notable perks: “Gender- and reason-neutral flexible work arrangement program” (what does that mean?), “Cold, anonymous” (yippee?), and “Dinosaur” (the ferocious or the fossilized kind?).
Time to compare and contrast. We invite you to have at it. Earlier:Vault 100 Open Threads- 2009
Good news for Legal Eagle Wedding Watchers: LEWW will be returning to a more frequent and timely posting schedule! Beginning next week, we’ll once again feature our gold standard of three fabulous couples per week to ogle and dissect.
We’ll bring you more hot August weddings tomorrow and Friday, but for now, it’s time for our readers to vote on a Couple of the Month for July. Although their write-up wasn’t in the NYT and therefore didn’t run in our normal LEWW column, we’re including celebrity professors Samantha Power and Cass Sunstein, whose union merited LEWW bonus coverage last month (as well as a shout-out in the Washington Post’s Reliable Source column).
For more information on these newlyweds, click on the link below. When you’re ready to vote, here’s the poll:
Tropical Storm Fay — what a beeatch! Doesn’t she know the job market is tough enough as it is?
The rising 2Ls at the University of Florida are really getting screwed because of Tropical Storm Fay. This thing hasn’t even hit land and is not even remotely near our school (but admittedly, probably is near the homes of some of the interviewers), yet the school has canceled the first three days of Early Interview Week OCI.
This is when many of the Biglaw / otherwise “good” employers come. All the firms are supposed to reschedule the interviews. But especially for the interviewers from non-Florida firms/offices, what [are the chances] that they’re going to make the effort to come back? Even if they do, by now they’ve probably started interviewing students from “better” schools.
Our correspondent wonders how other Florida law schools and law firms are dealing with the storm. If you have info to share, feel free to chime in.
Announcement emails from the career services office at UF, after the jump.
We received about 600 responses to this week’s ATL / Lateral Link survey on associate reviews, and there were some interesting twists.
First, while most firms, 60%, only conduct reviews once a year, a growing number, 35%, are providing six-month reviews as well.
A handful of firms split the difference, conducting six-month reviews for laterals and first-year associates, but then defaulting back to once a year. Others are conducting mid-year reviews for “underperforming” associates only, which doesn’t appear to be a great recipe for great press.
Of course, not many associates think that they’re underperforming:
* Almost 90% of respondents said that their reviews were “positive” (29%) or “very positive” (57%).
* Only 6% of respondents said that their reviews were “negative,” and only one percent thought they were “very negative.”
* The remaining 7% thought their reviews were simply “neutral.”
But even though almost 90% of respondents thought their reviews went well, that doesn’t mean they thought the reviews were fair. In fact, about a quarter of associates who thought their reviews were positive still said that they were actually more likely to look for a new job in light of those reviews.
Find out more about how associates reviewed their reviews, after the jump.
A tipster pointed out that NYU has revamped their website.
According to the tipster, “It’s hilariously awful and probably can indicate to the Violet alumni [at ATL] just how uncool the student body has become.”
This new web presence can only be understood as a direct challenge to former NYU students to find and pummel current NYU students. It’s about honor at this point.
If you don’t believe us, we invite you to click on Ping-Pong Man. If you do, you will learn that NYU students now are advised to make ping-pong play dates, that the game of ping-pong loosely resembles the Socratic method, and that Richard Posner has been called out.
There is also a student that informs us that her favorite NYC coffee shop still sells coffee “by the cup.” Great tip! So many New Yorkers still must suck their coffee out of a hose.
We think ping-pong man and cup girl should merge their interests and hang out where real NYU students spend their free time. Luckily, organizing beer-pong (or Beirut … discuss) is still easy enough to do over at Off the Wagon.
In honor of the new Vault rankings, we’re doing a series of open threads on the 100 most prominent law firms. We invite you to compare and contrast the firms in the comments. In the last open thread on Vault firms 6-10, there was an animated discussion about litigation at Cleary and which Kirkland office is best to work for.
Moving on down the Vault 100 list, here’s the next bunch up for discussion, with prestige scores in parentheses:
The oddest language in the “notable perks” in this bunch is at Williams & Connolly: “Fancy bunch of smarties.” Well-dressed intelligent lawyers, or a big basket of the tart candy?
Please discuss the work, perks, and lifestyle at these firms in the comments. More threads to come. Earlier:Vault 100 Open Threads- 2009
* College presidents around the country join campaign to lower the national drinking age to 18. [Associated Press]
* Post-September 11 laws have allowed the federal government to track the movement of U.S. citizens across land borders, with the data to be kept on record for 15 years. Is anyone really surprised? [Washington Post]
* Another judicial setback for the Bush administration, in the D.C. Circuit’s ruling on EPA emissions rules. [New York Times]
* New York settles suit with antiwar activists for $20 $2 million. [New York Times]
* Apparently, corporal punishment in schools is still legal in 21 states, and practiced in 13. [CNN]
* Lawyers shouldn’t screw over their clients. And definitely shouldn’t screw their clients’ wives. It’s going to cost one Mississippi lawyer $1.5 million. [ABA Journal]
* Lawyers are making out well in the Britney Spears custody battle. [CNN]
The law firm of Reed Smith — which, as its Google listing reminds us, is “[o]ne of the 15 largest law firms in the world” — has been in the news a lot lately. Here’s a quick recap.
Some of the news has been good, and some not-so-good. Let’s get the bad news over with first.
Last month, a Pennsylvania state court judge gave the green light to an overbilling lawsuit brought by a former Reed Smith client — a non-profit organization, no less. From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:
A Lawrence County Common Pleas Court judge rejected four of five objections by the Downtown law firm Reed Smith, which was sued by a youth foster-care foundation in a dispute over fees.
Bair Foundation, New Wilmington, Lawrence County, sued Reed Smith in November for billing it nearly $1 million — in contrast to the firm’s early estimate of $112,000 in legal costs — to defend the foundation in an employment discrimination lawsuit, according to the complaint.
The $112,000 was a revised estimate; the original estimate, according to the complaint, was $50,000. And Reed Smith’s client ended up losing in the underlying lawsuit.
According to Am Law Daily, “[t]he matter has turned into something of a public relations nightmare for Reed Smith…. The complaint paints a picture of a billing machine run amok.” For its part, the firm denies the allegations and claims that it “will prevail.”
More Reed Smith news, after the jump.
[Ed. note: This is the farewell post of FROLIC & DETOUR, who was recently eliminated from ATL Idol, the "reality blogging" competition that picked ATL's new editor. It is marked with F&D's avatar (at right).]
I’ve speculated about whether Sophist and I know each other. Well, we do. We wrote the HLS Parody together. Now I know that Shawn Johnson wasn’t BSing when she said she was thrilled that her team finished 1-2 in the all-around. I got the silver, but they’re playing my national anthem. Shortly after Elie won his job, I accepted an offer I’d been hoping for. As soon as I wind things up at the firm, I’ll be starting a new job in the law school world. Gold on beam! I think this worked out the right way for everyone. Thanks for the ride.
Last week we covered some goings-on — or non-goings-on, to those of you who found them boring — at Shearman & Sterling. Here’s a quick update.
We reported that, according to the firm, there have been no staff layoffs. One source writes:
I’d like to know how they define administrative staff, as they laid off their entire word processing / document production center (i.e legal word processors, proofreaders, EDGAR operators, and supervisors) in February 2007. It has since been disastrously outsourced….
Outsourcing from a year and a half ago isn’t what we had in mind when we asked about recent layoffs. But we pass that along, for what it’s worth; we do aim to be accurate.
In the comments, there were some rumors about start dates for 2009 associates. We’re looking into the rumors and will report back. If you can confirm, please email us. Update: We’re still waiting for official word from the firm, but one Shearman offeree confirms that yes, start dates for incoming associates next year will be no earlier than November 30, 2009.
Finally, we wondered whether there might be an interesting story surrounding the one out of 140 summer associates who didn’t get an offer. It turns out that there is.
Find out what it takes to get no-offered by Shearman these days, after the jump.
I recently passed the bar and am currently applying for jobs. My main concern is bringing out the most charitable result. Should I work in the nonprofit section where my services are passed directly along to the most needy, or should I get the high-paying firm job and donate the difference in my salary to charity?
A certain Harvard Law School grad might say, “Do the right thing at every moment” — and avoid the Big Bad Law Firm. But Freakonomics blogger Stephen Dubner seems more skeptical of public interest work:
I am not so convinced that working for a nonprofit means that one’s “services are passed directly along to the most needy.” Here’s one reason why.
One Freakonomics commenter’s response to the question of “public interest v. Biglaw”: neither.
If you want to make the most “charitable result”, you’re too late. Lawyers rarely add any value to the economy (after all, this IS an economics blog). Lawyers don’t make anything but they consume large amounts of capital, both human and financial. Had you wanted to be a net contributor to society, an MBA or engineering degree or medical degree or some such would have been the way to go or even just start a small business. This would allow you to actually produce something of value. A law degree only allows you to add friction to the economy….
Scrap the law degree, start a company, get rich, buy a big house and a big boat, give generously when you can and do what Buffett and Gates are doing, give it all away when you’re finished. Nothing wrong with that at all. That would be a life well lived.
My name is ELIE YING MYSTAL, f/k/a SOPHIST, and it looks like I will be taking over day-to-day editorial responsibilities here at Above the Law.
I would like to thank everybody who read anything that I’ve written over the past three weeks. I’ve always found writing to be a deeply personal experience and so I truly appreciate it when somebody bothers to read my work. Whether any of you actually liked it is a different question entirely, but one that we can work on together.
I’d also like to applaud the other contestants for their efforts. The best writing and journalism is almost always a collaborative process. I was impressed with what the other contestants were able to produce without the editors and other colleagues available to most professional writers. I hope this contest has given you all additional confidence about your own skills and talents.
I intend to rely heavily on the structures already in place here at ATL during this transition and beyond. I will learn everything I can from David Lat short of going “Sylar” with his brain. I was ecstatic to learn that many of the regular contributors to this site will be staying on. I will read as many comments as time allows, and try to draw out the “constructive” aspects hidden among the criticism.
I want to get better at this, and I will take advice on how to accomplish that in whatever form it is available.
More about me after the jump.
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Things have changed recently in Korea – a few of our US and UK client firms are looking, very selectively, for a lateral US associate hire. Until just recently, there was not much hiring like this going on in Korea, since US and UK firms started opening offices there. We have already placed two US associates in Korea in the past month at top firms. Most of the hiring partners we work with in Korea do not actively work with other recruiters.
If you are a Korean fluent US associate in London, New York or another major US market, 2nd to 6th year, at a top 20 firm, with cap markets or M&A focus (or mix), or project finance background, and you are interested in lateraling to Korea to a top US or UK firm, please feel free to reach out to us at email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org. Our head of Asia, Evan Jowers, was just in Korea recently, and Evan and Robert Kinney will be in Korea in a few weeks. We are in the process of helping several firms open new offices in Korea (a number of which are interviewing our partner level candidates) and also helping existing offices there fill openings.
Professor Joel P. Trachtman has developed a unique, practical guide to help lawyers analyze, argue, and write effectively.
The Tools of Argument: How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win is a highly readable 200-page book, available for about $10 in paperback or e-book. Chapters focus on foundational principles in legal argument: procedure, interpretation of contracts and statutes, use of evidence, and more. The material covered is taught only implicitly in law school. Yet, when up-and-coming attorneys master these straightforward tools, they will think and argue like the best lawyers.
For most attorneys, time spent managing the books is a necessary evil at best. Yet it is undeniably a crucial aspect of running a successful practice. With that in mind, we invite you to view or download a free webinar by Above the Law and our friends at Clio to learn how to better manage your finances.
Take this opportunity to learn what it takes to streamline your accounting and get the most out of your time. The webinar agenda:
● The basics of accounting for lawyers.
● How legal accounting differs from regular accounting.
● Report and reconciliation issues surrounding trust accounts.
● How to pick and integrate the best accounting tools for your practice.
● Steps to prepare your tax return for your firm’s income.
Do not miss this crucial chance to optimize your accounting practices. Save time and get back to billing!