Discussion of Firms and Life in SF/SV

[AngryMulletMan]

Well, where have you been, Sidd?

It's been, well, not as fun without you around.

AM(strangely hot for Sidd, still....)M

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Good lord, I've stumbled onto the Fashion Board.

Shhh...someone might hear you. I've long since given up on actually finding some information of value on these boards (juicy lawfirm gossip aside), and now I'm all about the entertainment value.

For all of you trashing the summer associates for taking the Brobeck offers, let's not forget that the market was pretty tight in late 01' and all of 02'. It's wasn't like the good old days when I came out and people were splitting between two or three firms in any given summer. Granted, in hindsight the writing was on the wall but put yourself in the position of a 2L or 3L back then. Would you have ever imagined that a firm with the distinguished history of Brobeck would collapse(I know I may get flamed for that last line, but what the hell)? The type of vision that people expect of law students should also apply to the hundreds of first,second, and third year associates that were also canned from Brobeck, Cooley, Wilson, VLG, etc. These people were much more marketable (at least one or two years of work experience) than these summer associates and many of them tried to hang on to the bitter end. I guarantee you they didn't stay because they wanted to be a "team" player. It's the market stupid.

I know its fun to ridicule the less fortunate among us but lest we forget we are all only an executive meeting away from landing on our asses.

[c2ed]

Yeah, it was a tight market. And I don't think all those who took offers there were idiots by any means.

There was at least one poster before, though, who had an offer at Brobeck among offers at other firms. When some of us said he/she may want to really consider those other offers because Brobeck didn't look too stable, the cacophony from poster saying the law student was an idiot not to take the Brobeck offer was rather dense. For those who were on the inside and still saying, "come on in, the water is fine," they really should have been able to see the writing on the wall just from the departures and the very public fighting among the partners (that is always a bad sign, no matter where you are).

Speaking only for myself (other posters can defend their own statements ... they're big boys), I have a lot of sympathy for those who thought they had jobs but those offers were revoked, torn away and are now non-existent. I think it sucks that many are now adrift and are having a difficult time finding employment. It simply is an unfair world.

C(hope they all landed well, but suspect they didn't, mostly due to a lack of any loyalty by BPH partners to the summers they had recruited)deuced

edited because my abysmally poor grammar obscured any point i was trying to make [/i]

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by legalbeagle
For all of you trashing the summer associates for taking the Brobeck offers, let's not forget that the market was pretty tight in late 01' and all of 02'. It's wasn't like the good old days when I came out and people were splitting between two or three firms in any given summer. Granted, in hindsight the writing was on the wall but put yourself in the position of a 2L or 3L back then. ...

I know its fun to ridicule the less fortunate among us but lest we forget we are all only an executive meeting away from landing on our asses.

Read the posts more closely. People are not (generally, anyway) trashing people for accepting offers at Brobeck. One poster, however, solicited the opinion of this board about whether em should go to Brobeck or pursue other offers, and when people suggested that Brobeck would be a dangerous choice, em got very up in arms. It was the classic "please give me advice....but how dare you tell me not to do what I'm planning to do!"

As to the position that law students were in, believe me, I sympathize. I'm one of those who graduated in the last recession, having summered at a falling (since fallen) firm, who had no offer as a 3L. Which, I believe, I told the erstwhile Brobeck summer associate.

Those with no choice had, well, no choice. Those who did, and made the wrong choice, are in bad straights, and it's sad. Certainly I don't expect law students to have great insight into the market or to have been able to predict that Brobeck would collapse -- in fact, some of my own GPs, people who've practiced for 15 years or more, thought I was off the deep end when, shortly after the Tower exodus, I said Brobeck would collapse. And, of course, there's the time-delay issue. 2Ls who accepted offers at BPH in the fall of 99 (when lots of people thought BPH was THE PLACE TO BE) worked in summer of 2000, graduated in spring 2001, and expected to have jobs in fall of 2001. In other words, by the time they got from square A to square B, the world had changed, dramatically.

This book "Be Careful Who You SLAPP" seems to bring controversy wherever I see it mentioned. New to this message board I find but one posting promoting it soon followed by a 'moderator' threatening the poster for spamming!!

Just so I learn the rules too - is it appropriate to discuss the merits of this book on this message board or do I too run the risk of being censored for referring to a book that is the subject of unlawful censorship?

By the way, I'm in no way connected with the Orrick and/or Pillsbury Winthrop law firms, both of which still face contempt of court.

Thank you!

C(hope they all landed well, but suspect they didn't, mostly due to a lack of any loyalty by BPH partners to the summers they had recruited)deuced

I heard from a source (I don't know how reliable) that none of the summers have even recieved any formal notification of the firm's dissolution and the consequential revocation of offers. If the partners of my firm laid me off and didn't have the decency to send me a letter or call, I would be pissed (at the least). This is especially true if they found another job before I had a chance to receive the standard:

"We have appreciated your commitment to Big, Big and Bigger, but due to unforseen circumstances your services are no longer needed. As I move on to a brighter future, I wanted to let you know that it was nice while it lasted. Feel free to call me between the hour of 12 and 1 (am or pm) at my new firm listed on the former Big, Big and Bigger website. Cheer up though, you could have been a POW in Vietnam."

[Sidd Finch]

[edited by mod after clearing with Sidd]

[SlaveNoMore]

Originally posted by schouten66
By the way, I'm in no way connected with the Orrick and/or Pillsbury Winthrop law firms...

But you clearly stand to profit from sales of the book, no?

not7yS

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
But you clearly stand to profit from sales of the book, no?

not7yS

I'm going to ask the regulars on this board to please trust me, and not engage this person and his or her socks. My objection to the prior post was not about advertising. The advertising of a self-published book doesn't particularly bother me at all, although other mods and admins may differ. I have seen the dispute between the authors of this book and their former employers have a terrible effect on other message boards, and I don't want it to happen here. I'm happy to explain off-line, but I would ask that you all leave it alone here.

If you think Gardener was bad, you haven't seen anything. That's what I'm saying.

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I'm going to ask the regulars on this board to please trust me, and not engage this person and his or her socks. My objection to the prior post was not about advertising. The advertising of a self-published book doesn't particularly bother me at all, although other mods and admins may differ. I have seen the dispute between the authors of this book and their former employers have a terrible effect on other message boards, and I don't want it to happen here. I'm happy to explain off-line, but I would ask that you all leave it alone here.

If you think Gardener was bad, you haven't seen anything. That's what I'm saying.

Word.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone_Slothrop
If you think Gardener was bad, you haven't seen anything. That's what I'm saying.

So how about 'dem Giants?

not7yS

[c2ed]

Sadly, I'm not that surprised that no one has written to them. Wouldn't be surprised if no one even thought to save the databases with their names in it to let them know that they don't have employment. It's pretty obnoxious, and the partners likely figure that all of the summers have heard of the dissolution through the grapevine and assume they don't have a job (as the entity hiring them no longer exists). Rather bad form not to send a note expressing some (even feigned) dismay and apology about the situation.

C(perhaps I should write a book on law firm etiquette... nah, it would gather too much dust)deuced

My point was not to 'advertise' a book. I don't particularly care about the book in question. My point is simply to discuss the reasons two giant law firms, the Orrick and the Pillsbury Winthrop would go to to censor a book, a self-published book at that.

I hardly think the authors of the book believe that they will get rich from advertising it here or elsewhere. For those who have written a book, I dare say it is not done for the money. Besides if anyone is concerned about the authors making a financial killing I think they can still read the book and not contribute to the sales simply by borrowing it from a library.

Again, I have no affiliation with Orrick or Pillsbury Winthrop.

[AngryMulletMan]

Do you have any idea whatsoever what an injunction is?

I suggest that 1) you and all your socks take heed; and 2) everybody else on the board support TS in deleting all future posts from this troll and all of em's socks.

I find you tiresome.


Added by T.S.:
I haven't deleted any posts yet without the express consent of the author, and at this point I hope not to.