Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Deep conversations with underrated lawyers.
This is Horum with Horum's Quorum. My guest today is Sono Mehta. Sono is a partner at Wilmer Hale, where she's also managing partner of the Silicon Valley office and also on the management committee of the firm. This conversation with Sono stands out for her openness on how to continually grow as lawyer at every stage and for the blend of analytical intuitive that she uses at work in in her career. Here's Sona.
Khurram Naik:Sona, I'm so glad that we are having this conversation. I know you're skeptical that you had an interesting story to begin this episode with, but I'm I'm excited to jump in with with this with the story of your your first deposition.
Sonal Mehta:Well, I I'm I'm not sure it's that interesting, but it was pretty mortifying. So I was a young associate. I was taking a deposition of a witness who we weren't sure what he knew about a particular topic. So we needed to take his deposition. Just figure that out.
Sonal Mehta:So I go into this deposition and the guy was so mad that he was being deposed. And I think what particularly angered him was that this, like, kid was taking his deposition. So I show up. I take the deposition. He's super hostile.
Sonal Mehta:Turns out he doesn't know anything. So fine. It's a very short deposition. I report to all the people on my team that it was a short deposition and it was a non event, and the guy was kind of a jerk to me. And then later, one of the more senior lawyers was reading the transcript and he came to me and he said, know, Sonil, I know it's your first deposition.
Sonal Mehta:But, you know, when you ask those questions at the beginning, like, does the witness understand that they're under oath, and are they able to testify truthfully and accurately, and is there anything that would preclude them from testifying truthfully and accurately? He's like, you can't just say all of those things and then move on to your questions. You have to, like, stop and ask a question and then have the witness answer before you move to the next point. And I was so mortified because it turned out I'd taken this deposition. That was like a total ultimately ended up.
Sonal Mehta:We figured out a total waste of time, but I couldn't even get the, like, five questions at the beginning that came out of the deposition textbook. Correct. I, like, totally screwed that part up. So, yeah, that was quite it was quite the experience, and I now actually know how to ask those questions. So everyone knows, I know how to confirm at the beginning that the witness knows that they need to testify truthfully and accurately the deposition can get through those questions before I start my depositions.
Khurram Naik:And then, like, was your second deposition how did that go?
Sonal Mehta:That part went better. I will say that part went better, but I we we we could talk about this more. But I, at the beginning of my career, definitely struggled with depositions. And there was a deposition not long later, like, that long after that, probably a few months after that that I took. And a partner was with me.
Sonal Mehta:And afterwards, he said to me, Kyosono, you're so good at everything else in this job. It's really strange that you're so bad at taking depositions. So that was, again, really it was a really affirming moment for me in my early practice as an associate that I was so good at taking depositions that I was getting that that comment back. But, you know, it did it did turn around, and I and I would like to think now that I'm actually much, much better at it, and it's actually one of my favorite parts of this job. But it just goes to show that you could be good at some things and be really bad at others.
Khurram Naik:What do you attribute early on to the challenges around depositions for yourself?
Sonal Mehta:I was try I I think I actually have spent a lot of time trying to figure this out. And I think I realized that I was trying too much to emulate other questioners. And so I had sort of examples of people that I thought were really great deposition takers. And so I would go in, and I would try to do the deposition in the way that I thought they would do the deposition. And I would get, I think, in my head about it, and it wouldn't be and I it would be awkward for me.
Sonal Mehta:And then I wasn't really, like, connecting with the witness or or being able to read the witness properly. I was really more focused on like, okay, now how would this person ask the next question? And it ended up just becoming this sort of, like, weird vortex of me trying to figure out what to like, predictively what someone else would do in response to that answer instead of, like, listening to the answer and then thinking about as the human sitting across the table from the witness, like, what's the appropriate follow-up or what's the admission that I wanna try to get? So I think I like, if I go back now and think about what I was doing, I was, like, playing lawyer as opposed to, like, being a lawyer. And I think once I got out of that, it got a lot easier and a lot better.
Khurram Naik:How did you make that transition?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I I wish I had, like, some, like, trick for how I did it. Candidly, I took, like I had this weird rhythms in my cases where there was, like, a period of a year where I had no depositions at all. And then I went and took another deposition, and it was like completely different. Like, some flip had there's some switch had been flipped, and I like suddenly felt like I knew what I was doing and I could do it.
Sonal Mehta:And then that deposition, I remember the deposition, I remember where I was, And I was like, oh, I can do this. Like, I know how to do this. This is great. And I think maybe it was the year in between that had me sort of distancing myself from, like, trying to mirror people that somehow made it better. And then suddenly, like, I was comfortable and I could do it.
Sonal Mehta:And from then on, it's been great.
Khurram Naik:And so now you you're still taking depositions today. Right?
Sonal Mehta:Yes. I I, I mean, I try very hard to give the younger lawyers on my team as as many opportunities as I can, but I love taking depositions, so I don't think I'll ever give it up.
Khurram Naik:And do you have a preference between facts and expert depositions?
Sonal Mehta:I mean, my favorite are expert depositions. I think I mean, if I could just take expert depositions every day for the rest of my career, I would be so happy. Unfortunately, there's other parts of litigation that you also have to do to get there, but that would be my absolute favorite. And I and I enjoy taking damages expert depositions, but I also really love taking, like, technical expert depositions. I've recently done a bunch of, like, economist expert depositions.
Sonal Mehta:Absolutely love taking expert depositions. Fact depositions are great too. Don't get me wrong, but the the material that you have to work with expert makes it especially fun.
Khurram Naik:Can you describe at a high level, like, what's your floss around depositions? Like, what's the strategy in terms of how much time you're taking, you know, in terms of what's are there types of admissions or or other kinds of work that you're getting? How are you thinking backwards from trial strategy? Can can you give us a sense of your philosophy and approach to expert depositions?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I think it's a little bit of of knowing what I need for either cross examination, a trial, or for just positive motions. And, you know, often there's a substantial amount of overlap between those two things and the set of admissions that you want. But I'm really thinking about usually when I go into a deposition, especially an expert deposition, what are the admissions that I want in, like, soundbite form that I could block quote in the introduction to my summary judgment motion to establish that they their expert has conceded something that means that my client wins. Right?
Sonal Mehta:Like, that's like the frame that I wanna think about an expert deposition in. Then once you do that, you're also getting, you know, the material that you need for the cross at trial, and then I also wanna have modules that are more sort of jury focused in terms of the cross that we might do of the expert at trial. But that's those are the sort of goals I'm really thinking about. I'm usually not wedded to an outline. I will have, you know, the expert reports in front of me.
Sonal Mehta:I will have some form of an outline with the sort of different topics I wanna cover and things like that. But I'm a much more sort of instinctual depo taker, I think, which is I start on a topic, and then I see where the expert goes, and then I'm gonna follow that. And often, it's about creating tensions or inconsistencies in the expert's opinions with other things that are happening in the case or the record. Often, it's about sort of forcing them to take a really extreme form of the position. Right?
Sonal Mehta:It's like, okay. Well, if that's your opinion, then this must be true, and then this other thing must be true, and then this other thing must be true. And if those things are true, then really what you're saying is this crazy thing
Khurram Naik:Mhmm.
Sonal Mehta:That no judge and no jury would ever believe is true, which means everything else falls apart. And so a lot of it to me is sort of listening and then the follow-up much more than, like, what's on the piece of paper. And there's been expert depots where I've had an outline, but I actually haven't really even spent much time with it at all. I really just looked at the report and the back and forth and followed what the expert said to its logical conclusion to get the admissions that I want.
Khurram Naik:And do you have an approach? I mean, I feel like there's I can think of you might have a more of a of a different categories of experts in sizing people up, but I I think about two kinds of experts. One is the highly credentialed big ego expert, and there's there's definitely ways in which, of course, they can trip up on their ego. Then there's also the very sophisticated has been deposed multiple times expert who is very good at not saying anything. Maybe you have other categories as well, but can you share with the kind of categories of experts you work with and techniques you use with those?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I think those are those are two good categories in terms of, like, number of experts that a lot of experts fall into both those categories. The other one, which in some ways is more challenging, I think, is first time or relatively newcomer expert where, you know, they're being called upon because they might actually truly be experts in that field, but aren't litigation pros, don't really understand the process. And, you know, all of those categories have, I think, different challenges to them, and I I would take different approaches in all of them. I think the with the newbie expert, right, the somebody that's, like, really steeped in a field but hasn't been in litigation before, I think one of the challenges there is they don't understand the litigation process often.
Sonal Mehta:And while there are some advantages to the taking attorney from that, one of the disadvantages is they're often, like, really reticent to answer questions, and they just sort of it's like they're kind of, paralyzed by the fact that they don't totally understand the process, and they're afraid that something they say is gonna be a problem. And you sort of have to break them out of that and get them to start actually engaging and get them to feel comfortable enough that they're not worried that every question is a trap, which maybe it is, maybe it's not, but they're not worried about that. Instead, they're starting to feel comfortable that they can actually just answer your questions. And then there's, like, the big ego experts. And with those guys or or gals, but often guys, we you know, every every questioner is gonna have a different approach, but my approach is look.
Sonal Mehta:Maybe it would be effective to, like, feed the ego. I have a really hard time doing that just in general in life. Like, I don't I don't have a lot of patience for people with big egos. So I don't really feed the ego, but I just try to neutralize it. Right?
Sonal Mehta:Like, it's like, I'm not going to go in and start challenging this person's credentials or opinions and get them all defensive and get the ego all worked up. Instead, it's going to be more about, like, what are the things that we can all agree on? Maybe let's start there. Right? And maybe it's about making that person feel like, oh, she doesn't really know what she's doing.
Sonal Mehta:She's like asking me a bunch of softball questions, maybe kind of soften the ground, get to some some points of agreement, some points of consensus, and then sort of start to build from there on what's the logical, you know, what's the logical next step down the line. If you agree with this, then you'd have to agree with me that this other thing and then you'd agree that this other thing and then you sort of let it go that way. And and if they're not feeling super challenged, often you can get them to agree to that. And I guess the the good thing about a witness that has a big ego is they're also really worried about their credibility. And so when they feel like their credibility is on the line, they will concede because they can't possibly be in a situation where, you know, another whoever they view to be their peers or maybe a small group of people, but whoever they view to be their peers thinks that they're not being credible.
Sonal Mehta:So but I it's you know, I don't know I don't know this because I guess I've never, like, observed myself taking these different depositions, but I suspect that my styles is actually not that different across these different modes of experts. Like, I'm sure there's some degree of phrasing the question and, you know, friendliness and warmth that probably changes a little bit. But, you know, I've heard stories about lawyers that go in, and they're like you know, they're they're sort of playing like, oh, I don't know what you're talking about. Teach me everything. And I just I can't do I can't, like, put on a, like, fake personality depending on who the expert is to try to draw out whatever version of the expert.
Sonal Mehta:I'm just not good at that. So I just kinda have to do my thing with more, like, tweaks around the edges of my questioning style than, like, totally different questioning styles.
Khurram Naik:And then do you have, like yeah. I know you use the word intuitive for for describing how you approach it. Is there something about time that you're tracking? Like, is there, like, benchmarks you have for, like, what stage that you wanna be at at at different hours?
Sonal Mehta:It really depends on how much material I have to cover and, like, how much I feel like I'm gonna be compressed for time. Usually, I don't feel super jammed for time and depositions. I think I'm a pretty efficient questioner, and I think I'm I'm pretty good at sort of gauging relatively early in the deposition, like how much the person is just going to sort of talk to fill the time. And so if I know that there's a witness that is gonna filibuster and, like, their whole strategies for to that the the different categories of experts you were laying out earlier, like the category in the middle where they've done it enough to know that they can sort of dance around the question and not answer the question. If I know I'm gonna be dealing with that type of witness, I will sometimes go in and say, okay.
Sonal Mehta:Here are the, like, four topics I'm gonna cover, and I need to be through these three by x time. I need you know, because I need an hour and a half for the last topic or whatever, and I could do, like, rough allocation of time. I also usually will go in with when I know there's gonna be time constraints with like, rank ordering of the priorities of the different topics I'm gonna cover. And then if I feel like time's getting tight or the witness is just, like, rambling and eating time, there'll be things that I'll skip because I know it'll just be a time sink, and I don't need them or whatever.
Khurram Naik:And when it comes to dealing with opposing counseling circumstances, I think of two categories of challenging behavior. One is lawyers that are there's a strong reference to coaching the witness or lawyers that are very hostile and, of course, making the expert feel this is a very adversarial I mean, of course, it's an adversarial process, but feeling like there's something to be gained out of overtly being hostile. How do you deal with the and maybe there's other circumstances too. How do you handle those challenges?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I think I think in some ways, those those issues are actually worse with fact witnesses than with experts because I think, you know, not always, but most of the experts that we all deal with have done it enough that, like, they're not they don't need the lawyer to be, like, super involved in terms of objecting and and, you know, really guiding the deposition, the defending lawyer. So I just I feel like in my experience, the the lawyers tend to be a little bit less involved in the in the deposition when it's an expert deposition. But regardless, whether it's expert or fact deposition, I mean, yeah, it's it's really unfortunate, but there are lawyers where you feel like, you know, it's clear that that statement was made with the direct intent to suggest to the witness what they should be saying. And I think, I guess, in terms of how I deal with it, courts these days, I think, have done a really good job setting out through local rules, through judges standing orders, through local practice and expectation, some real, I think, some real strong incentives for lawyers not to do the coaching and not to do the, you know, obstruction during deposition.
Sonal Mehta:So I think that helps a lot. And I think sort of pointing out that, you know, if that behavior continues, then it might get taken up with the judge, and the judge is not gonna have a lot of tolerance for that kind of behavior usually ends up working. But my my thing is, like, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna make a big deal out of it and yell back, and I probably will let it go the first time or two, especially if it's like a younger lawyer who may be just sort of trying to get their sea legs and figuring out how depositions go. But if it's someone really senior or it's happening over and over again, I think you just have to politely call it out and tell I've I think I've literally said in a deposition, quote, cut it out. You know what you're doing.
Sonal Mehta:You know what you're doing is wrong. Stop it. End quote. And it didn't happen again. There were no more coaching.
Sonal Mehta:There was no more coaching. There was no more, you know, commentary and colloquy in between the questions and the answers. That statement was made. The person actually looked a little embarrassed, and it went quite smoothly after that. So, you know, I think there's an element of just like calling it out.
Sonal Mehta:And people, when it's called out, sometimes they realize they need to stop. Usually, they realize they need to stop.
Khurram Naik:Yeah. I love that. What's the most in either fact or expert deposition, what's one the most surprising moments you've had in deposition?
Sonal Mehta:I I mean, I don't know that it's one, but I gotta tell you, like, I have had some experts that have just, like, given up the farm. Like, like, in ways it's like, were you prepped? Like, did you did you write the report in this case? How is it possible that that's the answer to the question? But, like, the only implication of that answer is that your kit your client's case or your the party that you're representing their case literally cannot stand any longer.
Sonal Mehta:I like I've had that with technical experts and IP cases where the technical expert has admitted something that would, you know, maybe not in exactly those words mean non infringement, but basically, like, in response to a hypothetical, where it was like, okay. Well, you know, assume x, y, and z. Would the answer be yes or would the answer be no? And they got it wrong. And they said no, which means my client wins.
Sonal Mehta:And then we took that admission, and we went to the judge, and we won summary judgment. So I have to say, like, it is a little surprising actually when someone that's, like, spent so much time on the case, worked on a report, presumably went through the report multiple times with their lawyers to prepare for the deposition when they just, like, sometimes just give you the absolute wrong answer from their client's perspective. I do find that surprising. Now I find it awesome. And, you know, that's like a really, really good day, and I have some really, like, fond memories of those days.
Sonal Mehta:But it's like, I still can't believe it when it happens.
Khurram Naik:So I I I think what's so interesting is that you went from depositions being it sounds like one of the most challenging things to you, and it was perceived by the team that you're working with as well, to what are your strengths. Do you feel like that's often the case for people? Because I I would say for myself, the things that I feel like I would say things being, like, being oriented to growing a network or something you know, being in sales capacity or even writing. You know, these are things that historically I didn't perceive to be strengths of mine that in pursuing them not to be strengths of mine, I I worked on them and found my own ways to practice them, and now I I perceive them to be strengths of mine. So I've noticed that myself, and it sounds like that's true for you.
Khurram Naik:Have you observed that in others? Do you think that's that's much more common than we realize is that the the things that later in someone's career becomes their strength is something that's sort of as a weakness?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, it's I hadn't actually thought about it that way until you just phrased the question that way. But as you were going through those examples, I was thinking about sort of my own examples of, like, things that were issues that I struggled with or parts of this job I struggled with and now I think maybe are amongst my strengths. And I think you're right that well, I I guess I would say this. I think it is true for some people that those areas of weakness end up actually being the areas in which they're stronger because they put in the time to improve on them.
Sonal Mehta:If it's pointed out to you that it's an area of weakness or you realize it's an area of weakness, it it becomes something that you're then thinking about and you're conscious of, and I think you're trying to improve. I but I also think there are some people, or some areas in which for people, it might be a weakness, but you, like, don't have it in you to try to improve it or you don't want to improve it or you think it's like you can't because it's not consistent with your personality to improve it. So I guess that's a more of a it's a little bit of a wishy washy answer, but I think it depends. But I I do think you're right that, like, like another area for me that was like such a challenge, and I still hate it, to be fair. Like, I hate it, but I think I'm getting better at it.
Sonal Mehta:Is the like network building and business development? Like, I just it was awful. I hated it. I never thought I'd be able to do it. I never thought I'd be able to have any clients because I never thought I'd be able to meet any clients because I just found the whole thing to just be like.
Sonal Mehta:Like there was like this mystique around business development. And then and then when people talk to me about how they did it, I thought it was like all super awkward, like social interactions that I would never want to have. And now I think I'm like, fine. I don't I don't like it and I'm not great at it, but I like know enough people that I like, you know, can keep myself occupied and out of trouble. But I had to spend a lot of time working on it, and people had to kind of push me, actually, some ways, maybe more than I had spent time working on it.
Sonal Mehta:Like people that were my mentors, people that I were working I was working with had to push me to do it really kind of aggressively because I was really resisting it. And they and thankfully, they pushed me to work on it as a young lawyer and it got better. But I do think there's an element of like going back to your original question, which I know is now ages ago. Like, there's an element of both the self internal motivation and drive to improve in areas of weakness. And then there's the element of like, people pushing you to improve.
Sonal Mehta:And for me, I think I have a a bit of that self drive, but I also have been lucky to have the people at every stage of my career pushing me to improve.
Khurram Naik:So I I think it's remarkable to hear someone who's accomplished as much as you have say they're having a challenge around something that would maybe perceived as a core function. Like, hey. You're a partner. That's that's the core function. You're also on the managing committee of of Wilmer Hale, which is, you know, a very, established and, you know, well regarded firm.
Khurram Naik:So I think it'd be very valuable for a lot of people to hear about how you're approaching this and and how you're, there's some a challenge even someone with as many accomplishments is is is is working through. So can you share a little bit, like, what's working for you, and, like, how are you thinking about, like, progressing through this and and and how you're thinking about improving this and making it more tractable for you?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, look, it's been a I think it's been a journey for me to use the cliche. Like, when I was a young when I was a senior associate and a young partner, I was was given some coaching, like, while I was I I made partner while I was an associate there, and I made partner there, I was a young partner there. And they identified for new partners these, like, business development mentors that were senior partners that were very successful at the firm, usually in different practice areas, and in my case, even a different office, whose relationship was to mentor me in business development. And and like, I'm so thankful.
Sonal Mehta:Like, you know, he made me like write a business plan as a first year partner, and I hated every minute of it. And I hated I hated the process of making the plan. I hated everything I thought I might have to do to execute on the plan. Like, would write down things that I was going to do. And as I was writing them down, I'd be like, I can't believe that I would ever have to do this.
Sonal Mehta:This is going to be so awkward to people. So it really went from like being forced, thankfully, to think about it and plan for it and sort of confront that I hated it. To then the way that my sort of evolution of thinking has has happened is realizing that actually, even though I went through that whole process, like it wasn't that wasn't going to work for me. Like having a formal business development plan, having like a, you know, here are the people that I'm going to check-in with every month. Here's the articles that I'm gonna write.
Sonal Mehta:I'm gonna go speak on x number of panels. I'm gonna go to y conference and go to this cocktail party. Like, that kind of formality to this just was never gonna work for me because after writing it all down, I just, like, was dreading doing any of it. And then the journey has been realizing that, at least for me, what works to the extent it works, is just, like, actually getting to know people that I like. And, you know, it's amazing to me how so many of the opportunities that I've had and the really great, like, connections and great work that I've had have been with where there was no intentionality behind it at all.
Sonal Mehta:Like, it was just somebody that I struck up a conversation with or somebody that I, like you know, they asked me for a favor, and I did them a favor, and I never thought I'd hear from them again. And then lo and behold, like, something happened. Right? Just like sort of it sounds so oversimplified and maybe a little bit naive, but I think just like putting good things out into the world and coupling that with, like, doing good work has been really successful for me to again, to the extent anyone would say I have success in that area. And it it also is just a lot easier for me.
Sonal Mehta:It's like a lot easier for me to, like, do good work and just, like, genuinely talk to people that I like and spend time with people that I like than doing anything formal. And it's and, like, you know, a lot of the people I work with are, like, clients that I work with or people that I, like, was associates with. Like, that's the other thing I think people don't realize maybe when they're growing up in the law. So for those of you that are, like, a little more junior in your career, like the person down the hall that's your peer today, they will as you get more senior in this business, so will they, even if they're not at the firm anymore. And those people end up, like, wanting to work with you in the future when they become clients.
Sonal Mehta:And so many of the people that I work with as clients or former colleagues of mine, I teach a class at Berkeley, and a number of my clients are former students from the class who then years later went in house and, you know, had a problem and called me. And so for me, that's just been much more successful than any kind of, like, you know, networking plan that I could then go execute on.
Khurram Naik:Mhmm. So it's it sounds like this is also an intuitive process. So it sounds like
Sonal Mehta:It is.
Khurram Naik:Well or Yeah. When you have an intuitive process. You know, I wanna go back to something you're talking about about when you're early in doing early in your deposition journey, and you were noticing, oh, I'm really trying to respond like this other lawyer that I admire or have learned from. And I guess the way I would phrase that is finding your voice. Were you able was it were you were you able to find your voice else from that time than just, like, the deposition part were slower, or is that just part and parcel of generally finding your voice, and that was something that you came into?
Khurram Naik:And and can you talk about that process?
Sonal Mehta:I actually think that that was the maybe the most acute example of the overall process of finding my voice because I I definitely had that in other places too, I think. And it was and I think every lawyer goes through this. I think for me, it was especially difficult because I did not have many women or really any women mentors or senior women to look up to as I was growing up as a young lawyer. And I I mean, I had tremendously talented, like, you know, off the charts talented mentors and senior lawyers to look up to. Don't get me wrong, but they were all men.
Sonal Mehta:And so my sort of examples of, like, very basic things like, you know, how do you start a meet and confer call with opposing counsel and, like, build that rapport? You know, they were all men. And so I, like, I I often give this example to younger lawyers, but, like, probably one of the biggest struggles that I had was figuring out how to build a rapport with opposing counsel that's, like, organic and genuine when the examples I would sometimes see would be, like, the senior partner getting on the phone with opposing counsel and the start of the call being like, hey, buddy. Did you catch the game last night? And, you know, the, hey, buddy.
Sonal Mehta:Did you catch the game last night? Like, I can't start a meet and confer a call that way. First of all, I don't know what the game was. I definitely didn't catch it. And then, like and everybody knows that.
Sonal Mehta:I mean, there's nobody that would think that I caught the game last night. It's it'd be a miracle if I knew what sport we were in, you know, in terms of the season. Right? So that was a big struggle for me is like, how do I do that thing, which is really important, like developing a relationship and a rapport with opposing counsels like critical to being able to serve your clients' needs. How do I do that if I don't have the Hey buddy?
Sonal Mehta:And I just kind of had to figure it out. And I do think there, you know, there are people that are better at that now than me. Like, are definitely people that have more of an ability to connect on that kind of thing than I do. But I've sort of figured it out well enough that I can do it and it serves my clients' needs. And that's true for courtroom advocacy.
Sonal Mehta:It's true for depositions. It's true for, you know, business development interactions. It's true for when I go and pitch a case. It's true for when I'm interacting with opposing counsel. Like, in every aspect of this job, I think there was a learning curve for me to find my voice.
Sonal Mehta:And I, you know, I think there were parts of it that were harder than others, and depositions might be an example of that.
Khurram Naik:Can you speak to subsequently the lawyering itself as far as, like, legal decision making, judgment, analysis? How did you come into your own voice there? Because it's just so easy to try to say, well, I guess, like, how would you think about this case? But, I think there's, a lot to be said for how you approach your own case. And this is something, I just interviewed Silpa Marbury, and, that was something that was a hallmark of her earlier career and kinda set her in the path where now she's a founding partner of a law firm.
Khurram Naik:And so she she had some it sounds like creativity was in following her own Desmond was a key part of her story, and I'm curious what your thoughts are for yourself for how you can find your your voice subsequently.
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. Okay. So now this is gonna sound arrogant. I don't mean it to sound arrogant, but that's actually not somewhere where I felt like I struggled as much. Like, I think even from when I was a very young lawyer, like, rightly or wrongly, for better or for worse, I always had a pretty high degree of confidence in my judgment about things.
Sonal Mehta:And I almost always have, like, a pretty strong early instinctive reaction to sort of like what the right thing was. And like, of course, you know, I would need the factual and the legal inputs to that. Like, I need I need to understand what the legal frame is that we're looking at. I need to understand, like, the facts on the ground were. But like the what we should do after we know what the facts are and what the law are and we've, like, laid out the sort of, you know, here are the different options.
Sonal Mehta:Here's what we here's the, you know, should we do A, B, or C? Which of those things we should do and the why and how we should execute on them? Again, rightly or wrongly, and probably a lot of instances, naively, I always kind of just had a gut of like, okay, I thought about a, I thought about b, I thought about c. Like, I can see the pros and cons. Like, we should do b.
Sonal Mehta:Here's why we should do b, and here's how we should execute on b. And so that was a place where I didn't feel like I needed to I needed to find the skills to do the execution. I needed to gain the credibility to convince people that I was right, but I didn't struggle with figuring out what I thought the answer should be.
Khurram Naik:Okay. So let's take someone who was counseled. Hey. You know what? You're really great.
Khurram Naik:So early in the career, you're really great at depositions. So opposite advice to you. But you have a challenge around exercising your own judgments around in confidence in your own decision making, around applying frameworks just in the way that you're talking about, how would you counsel that lawyer? Who who's kind of your inverse in that way?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I I mean, this is hard for me because it it for me, it is more instinctive. But I think what I would counsel them to do is, you know, essentially what I said my gut does for me, which is the baseline for all of this is, of course, knowing the law and knowing the facts. We can't we can't operate as lawyers if we don't do that. So I'm assuming that once you have that, I guess what I would counsel them to do is think about what are the options?
Sonal Mehta:Like, what's the menu of options? What are the pros and cons of the menu of options? And like and there, I think you have to think expansively. Like, there's obvious pros and cons in any decision, but there's often like secondary or tertiary pros and cons that are less obvious, and that requires some effort and some experience and to really think through. And I would encourage people to really think about like sort of first order pros and cons, but also secondary and tertiary order pros and cons.
Sonal Mehta:And then I think, you know, at that point, that's then it gets hard. Then it's like, okay. So now I looked at all the pros and cons. How do I make a decision? And I guess, you know, again, this is coming from someone who's more like an instinct person on this sort of thing.
Sonal Mehta:But I guess for me, it would be priorities in terms of end goal. And because those priorities are gonna let you weigh the pros and cons. Right? So if you have a bunch of pros and you have a bunch of cons, you're like, well, there's a lot of pros and a lot of cons here. Like, how do I make a decision?
Sonal Mehta:One of those, either in the pro column or the con column, is gonna go to the whatever the most important goal is of a particular project or a particular matter or a particular business. And I think you then have to be sort of you you at least for me, like, you're making a judgment based on, you know, I have to do something here even when it's not gonna be I don't have perfect knowledge. Let me go with something that based on what I think the priorities are, are going to help me optimize the outcome that I want. And I think all of like what I just laid out is, I guess, a very logical way of thinking about what I think kind of my gut is doing when I'm thinking about it from that perspective. The other thing I would tell people that are struggling with that is you're not always going to get it right.
Sonal Mehta:And if you are paralyzed by the desire or the need to, like, know with certainty that the decision that you're making is going to work out the way that you think it's going to work out or you want it to work out. Like, you got to just get over that. Like, we make decisions in life. I mean, in law, but in life, you can only make the best decision you can at the time that you have to make it with the best information available to you at that time. That's all we could ever ask for from anyone.
Sonal Mehta:And, you know, you don't always have all the information or circumstances might change. But you gotta just make the decision, and then you've gotta be able to, like, live with the consequences and trust that you're doing the best you can now, and that you will also, your future self will be in a good position to deal with whatever the consequences are. Hopefully, it all works out exactly the way you want, but if not, you have to trust that you'll be there to deal with the consequences, and your future self will exercise its judgment to optimize at that moment in time.
Khurram Naik:I'm gonna use this as a jumping off point to explore another moment in your career, and I'm gonna ask you. So so I'm gonna reflect back that you're saying you don't always know if you're gonna get it right. You you've got a certain set of of facts before you. The world is uncertain. You may not have all the relevant facts.
Khurram Naik:The world will change, but you just have to move forward, and you have to apply your judgments and based on past decision making to to move forward and and and make decisions in the face of uncertainty. And I think that's a very powerful concept because in my role as a legal recruiter, I see this routinely with lawyers, big law lawyers, who are so used to I think it's largely driven by the billable hour, which is so used to mining for more and more facts. More and more analysis is the solution rather than saying, at some point, you'd say good enough, and you have to make a decision. And not just based on facts, but then also intuition that you're talking about, gut. And you have to blend those two to make, you know, factually informed, holistic decisions.
Khurram Naik:So I think that's a very important concept for a lot of lawyers to consider. And I'm curious for your career change when you're moving from Weil to Dirty Tangri, how did you apply that concept? Did you apply that that that decision making tool to make that change?
Sonal Mehta:Yes. I did. But, like, again, in the way that I make decisions, which is I think part of it was my gut too. Right? And I and I will say, like, that decision, I I just still I mean, to this day, it's been almost 10 now, is the single hardest decision I've ever made in my career and maybe in my life, honestly.
Sonal Mehta:Like, it it was an agonizing decision, and it took me a really, really long time to even be open to thinking about it. And then it took me a really, really long time once I was open to thinking about it to make up my mind. And then there was a period after I made up my mind where I didn't think I'd made up my mind. I was agonizing over whether that was really the right decision or not. It was it was a long process, and there was a lot of lost sleep, a lot of sleepless nights over that.
Sonal Mehta:But the decision making process that I went through was funnily enough formal. It was a more formal decision making process than what we've been talking about. And it was along the lines of what I just, like, talked to you about, the, like, procons and evaluating them and thinking about the importance. And it and I actually wrote it down, and I have, like, a spreadsheet. And so this is, like, so not sonal.
Sonal Mehta:Like, the most non sonal way to make a decision, which was like, I had a matrix of all the factors and the pros and the cons, and I weighted it and everything. And so when I said it was sort of funny that you asked that, it's like, yeah, I had this, like, super formal process. But I think, honestly, like, if you if you put me back in the headspace that I was in at the time, everything about the process was really ultimately being driven by my gut. And so what I mean by that is, like, I had all these factors and, you know, it was like this agonizing decision. And then at the end, I think that the way that I waited them and the way that I sort of came to the decision was really based more on instinct than anything else, which I think really just goes to the point we were talking about earlier, which is I think the I think my instinct in some ways, like, just inherently does the pro con analysis that I'm talking about.
Sonal Mehta:Or maybe the pro con analysis is a way to, like, manifest what's happening when I make a gut decision. I think that's probably true for everyone. Right? Like and and maybe really when we talk about people that are more instinctive and people that are less instinctive, like, it's really less about is it a different decision making process, or is it more about how much you trust your instinct in an express way as opposed, like, I like, I I, like, know that I can trust my gut versus people that feel like they wanna go through the more formal process. And so they're not calling it instinctive or instinctual.
Sonal Mehta:They're really saying that they're going through a process. Because I I think in a lot of cases, it reduces to the same thing. But anyway, that was my process. It was an agonizing, awful process, worst year of my life, and then and hardest decision I've ever made, and then I ended up going with my gut.
Khurram Naik:What even prompted this decision? Because, you know, you started out while you may partner there, so things clearly were going well there. What even got you thinking about making a change?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, it like I said, it was like it actually was a process to even get me to be open to the idea of leaving. I loved my time at Weil. Just genuinely, like, had the best experience there. Could not have asked for a better place to grow up as a young lawyer.
Sonal Mehta:Felt like I got such amazing experience and opportunity and mentorship and training from, you know, the best in the business. And and, like, the people that were there at the time that I was working with are just, like, so incredible. And I'm so grateful for the time that I had there. And I honestly, like, thought I would be there my whole career. Like, I wasn't thinking about leaving.
Sonal Mehta:What got me thinking about or got me to be open to the idea was the Dre Tang Rio opportunity came up, and, you know, it was sort of a new thing for them too. I was the first lateral partner ultimately that they had, and they hadn't really ever thought that they would do that because they formed as a boutique of people that knew each other professionally, but also were really close friends. So it was really, you know, in some ways, like, kind of like a family firm. Right? Like, they were all so close, and they'd all worked together for so long.
Sonal Mehta:And they were thinking about whether there might be it might make sense to bring someone else on. And so when that opportunity presented itself, it was like it was the kind of thing that I it's like, it never had occurred to me that that would be something that I could do because, like, they had never had a lateral partner before. And, you know, so it's like not an option. And then suddenly, like, there was a conversation and I was like, oh, I guess I should think about this because I, like, never would have thought about this before. And that's what really got me thinking about it.
Sonal Mehta:And then I I think your question ultimately was like, what made me decide to move? And I think it was a combination of again, sometimes I need a push. It was a push. And this one actually came from myself, not from other people. But it was an internal push to bet on myself and do something that was not the sort of safe, obvious thing to do.
Sonal Mehta:Like, things were going great at Weil. I loved it there. I'd worked with the same people for twelve and a half years. I love those people. I still love those people, and they're still friends.
Sonal Mehta:And I still respect them as lawyers and respect them as people and consider them close friends. And so it was like it was like such the safe, easy thing to do to stay. But I felt like I think I felt like I needed the internal push of like, okay. Maybe you need to try to go do something a little bit different and take a little bit of a risk here even though things are going great, and to have that independence, to maybe see how I could operate as a lawyer without the same set of people that I've been working with for twelve and a half years, without the comfort of knowing exactly who was gonna be on my teams and who the clients were and all of that. And it was that push to, like, bet on myself and sort of see my what might happen if I went out and did something different that ultimately, I think, was the instinct that drove the decision.
Khurram Naik:And when you say bet on yourself, what was the potential upside, and what was that risk?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I think look. You know, look at while, like, I was a very young partner, so I had a few of my own matters or matters where the client had sort of primarily come to me, but not a lot. Like, I didn't have, like, you know, a huge set of matters and a huge track record as a first chair lawyer. And I, you know, I'd done a trial as a as a co lead with someone, and then I had, like, a few small cases where I was first chair, but it was all sort of new.
Sonal Mehta:And so the potential upside was, you know, I would be able to go and be the lead lawyer. And I don't mean that in a, like, your name's at the top of the caption kind of a way. For me, it was more about, like, it's my strategy and my judgment that is going to guide the outcome in this case. And that was, like, what was really appealing to me was to be able to, again, like sort of think about how do I see this case? How do I see us winning this case?
Sonal Mehta:Trusting my gut on that and being in a position to sort of steer the outcome of the case was like really, I thought it would be really rewarding to me to be able to do that. So there's that, like, you know, that was the potential upside. Right? It was like, I could maybe do more of that if I was at a place where I wasn't with the same people that I've been working with forever and where it was new clients too, right, where the clients didn't already have people that they had worked with and teams they'd worked with forever, but there would be, like, potentially new clients and new people to work with. And so that was the independence and the sort of upside.
Sonal Mehta:The downside is the obvious downside, which is like like, nobody would ever hire me and no one would ever wanna work with me, and I'd show up and have no work and nothing to do. And the sort of notion that, like, I was gonna be able to lead cases was one that was a delusion, and there that was the risk. Right? Is that that that that was all totally delusional, and nobody would trust me with their matters. Thankfully, people did trust me with their matters, and it worked out okay, but that was the risk.
Khurram Naik:Can we talk some more about your spreadsheet? Like, were there, like, say, like, three top factors in that that we can talk about? And, like, how did your spreadsheet work?
Sonal Mehta:Oh, Coram, there are so many more than three factors. So there were three tiers. I actually I'm I'm in in anticipation of this, you prompted me to go back and look at it, which I hadn't done in, like, nine years. But there were three tiers of importance. And in each tier, there were multiple factors and they were they were given weights.
Sonal Mehta:So tier one had a 50% weight, and tier two had a 30% weight, and tier three had a 20% weight. And then there was a point value assigned to each factor from one to five. But the I'll give you a couple of examples on here of like the ones that that were in different buckets. You can kind of see what was what was driving it. So in the first tier, the the highest importance tier for me, independence actually was one of them.
Sonal Mehta:So sort of going back to what I think ultimately drove the the decision a lot of ways, that was a really important factor, I think, in the decision. Collegiality and collaboration was really important to me as well, and that was not something that was pushing me away for a while. I mean, if anything, that would have been something that was that was weighing in favor of staying because I had had a family there really in terms of the people that I'd worked with. But that's that's super, super important to me is working somewhere where I was on the team. I was part of the team.
Sonal Mehta:The team had my back and vice versa, and there was no, like, internal competition. Easy to work with clients is on there, because I think, like, the the quality of life you has a have as a lawyer depends a lot on the clients. Mhmm. And having clients that are collaborators and partners and respect their outside counsel and view it as a long term partnership is super important. And, you know, there are some clients that are easier to work with than others, and it was important to me to feel like from a quality of life perspective that I would have clients that would that would fall on the easier to work with side of the scale.
Sonal Mehta:So those are like, practice reputation, those are kind of in the top tier in terms of importance. The second tier I'm not going through all of them, by the way. I'm just going through some examples. Second tier was tranquility and, like, lack of internal politics, competition, drama, whatever the word is for it. Like, feeling like you're at an institution that's like a stable institution where everyone's, like, generally rowing in the same direction.
Sonal Mehta:That was important, and that was in tier two for me. Senior lawyers that would be mentors to me was on the list. So as much as I was looking for independence, I also, like, definitely didn't wanna be in a situation where I didn't have access to, like, really high quality and high caliber senior lawyers that could mentor me. The size and the complexity of the matters that I would work on was in that category as well. It was important to me that the quality of my peers would be incredibly high both from a, like, collegiality and interpersonal perspective, but also from a, like, these are all lawyers that I think are amazing and, like, really talented.
Sonal Mehta:I'm learning from them, and I'm, like, proud to be at the firm and be their colleagues. That's really important to me, and that was on the list. And then I'll go to the I'll skip some and go to the third tier. The third tier included things like location, like my commute. It included things like firm economics and stability, which I'm not sure that that should really be a third tier, but it was at that time for me in that decision making process.
Khurram Naik:Also, eyes up, you know
Sonal Mehta:It's it is. So, you know. Yeah. Totally. Although it was a little bit it was a, like, a little bit more of a of a structural question at that particular time because I was deciding between a big law firm and a boutique.
Sonal Mehta:And so there was more it was less about sort of, like, evaluating the financial stability of the individual firm as, like, more of the model question. Mhmm. But still, I mean, it is it was hard to make judgments about that. And, you know, both of them would have been fine and were fine on that metric. And then work variety and diversification was also something that I was thinking about.
Sonal Mehta:It was on my list in that third tier. What what you would find interesting, maybe some people might, is that comp, like compensation, was in the third tier, and it was also expressly, termed as compensation over five years because I wasn't really focused on compensation in the first few years at all. And even over five years, it was only a third tier consideration as opposed to a first tier consideration for me.
Khurram Naik:And then looking back in terms of doing a post op of that decision, were there factors of those that translate to me most relevant? And I asked this because there's another patent litigator partner that I know that made a move, and he worked with a skillful recruiter who explained to him, let's talk let's figure out what's important to in advance. And then as he's going through through interviews, he would you know, this partner would rank the different firms by this criteria and and then also rank which firm he's enjoying the most. And then this recruiter pointed out, hey. Look.
Khurram Naik:You're the things that you said at the outset are most important to you aren't in fact the things that you're valuing most in the firm. So what you thought was important isn't as important as you as you thought it was. What did you experience anything like this, or are you pretty validated with the things that you knew in advance to be important turned out to be the things that were really important to you?
Sonal Mehta:Well, I would say the things that I thought were the thought the things that I thought were important to me, I think, did turn out to be important to me. But part of the reason for that is there's, like, literally, like, 25 things on here. So it's, like, hard to. I don't think I missed anything. I, like, covered every single possible factor you could have.
Sonal Mehta:So it it was not the case of, like, as I was going through my process, I was like, oh, you know, I didn't I didn't have that on my list, but now I'm realizing that's really important. Everything was on my list, important or not. But what I did find that's sort of consistent with what you just said is it was I now looking back at it, it's like very clear to me that the numerical values I assigned for these different things are not like in any way objective and were completely driven by like what my gut was telling me the decision should be. And and that was driven by independence, I think. Right?
Sonal Mehta:Like, I think ultimately, like, as as much as I loved Weil, like, if the thing that drove me to to go was feeling like I kinda needed to do my own thing and see, like, sink or swim, see what it would be like just to be me. And everything about this matrix and the values that I filled out in this, I think we're colored by that. Like, as much as I thought I was like doing this, like, super rigorous diligence process and, like, very objectively, you know, assigning these point values. I don't think I was.
Khurram Naik:Did the fact I mean, you've heard a while that team is your family. Did the fact I can see how that fats could could cut in direction of, oh, wow. I shouldn't leave. Couldn't it just as equally or or did it just as equally factoring to say, hey. They're always gonna be I'm always gonna have a special relationship with this team, and they'll always be in life my life in some way.
Sonal Mehta:So, I mean, you're right. That's what turned out to be the case. Like, the people that I was close with, I stayed close with, and and still I've, like you know, I'm still their cheerleader, and I root them on and want them to be successful, and I'm so excited when I see their successes. At the time though, like, I I think when you're in that moment, you don't have the clarity to, like, know that the people that you're gonna be friend you know, that you're friends with, you'll be friends with forever. Like, at least I didn't.
Sonal Mehta:You know, part of it was that's like the only real job I ever had. I mean, I had, like, a summer internship in college, and then I was like a paralegal for six months between college and law school, and I taught LSAT and GRE classes through the Princeton Review. But, like, the only real job I'd ever had was working at Weil. And and I'd been there forever, and I had been with these same people forever working with them forever. And so at the time, I thought, you know, the people I was closest with, like, I knew that we would still be in touch, but I just thought it was gonna, like, irrevocably change the nature of our relationship.
Sonal Mehta:I thought they would be mad at me. I had a lot of guilt, a lot of guilt around leaving. And so it wasn't like com it wasn't like a comforting thing that I was really close with them. I think it actually made the decision so much harder. I think if I'd had a little more separation from them and hadn't felt so close to them, it would have been easier, and I would have made the decision a lot faster than I did.
Khurram Naik:And then what ultimately led you to move from Dury Tingri to Wilmer?
Sonal Mehta:So, again, this was like a similar process, which is like I these are things that I feel like, least for me, are more about external or internal pushes to take risks. Things were going great at Dory Tanger. It was a great firm. Really, really like, I mean, you know, talk about, like, punching above your weight. Like, the caliber of the lawyers and the matters that that that are, like, the small San Francisco boutique was handling is, like, really kind of amazing to think about.
Sonal Mehta:It no longer exists in that same form. But at that time, it was, like, you know, really kind of amazing, and things were going great there. Like, my practice was booming. I had sort of this I went from, you know, in 2019 wondering if anyone would ever hire me to be their lawyer to, like, having this booming practice, having all these amazing clients and trusting me with, like, things that, you know, frankly, I'm not sure I was qualified at the time as a younger partner to be entrusted with, but I was, like, learning and and growing and rolling with it, and I was able to deliver these great outcomes for some of these clients. And the internal push this time wasn't independence, but it was, wouldn't I be able to do more if I had more resources, if I had more people, if I had more expertise, across different practices or different areas?
Sonal Mehta:Like, couldn't I help clients solve bigger problems? And some of that was, like, like, truly, like, internal. And some of that also was from clients who were like, you know, like, such a great firm. You guys are awesome. But, like, you know, there's sort of a cap on what we can give you in terms of the scale of the matter because you just don't have the, like, resources.
Sonal Mehta:And have you ever thought about what your practice could look like if you were back on a bigger platform? And so that was the this this time it's, like, the coupling of the internal and the external push of, you know, everything's going great. Why would I take the risk? Well, maybe I should take the risk and see, if the practice can expand into sort of more complicated, more interesting matters, bit or bigger scale matters or however you wanna think about it if I have the resources of a firm with broader expertise.
Khurram Naik:Why Wilmer, not while again?
Sonal Mehta:You know, I've been working with Wilmer on some matters as co counsel and, like, was really impressed by the lawyers, and we had a lot of common clients with Walmart. So, like, the client map really kind of worked out well. There are a couple there are a couple clients that unfortunately, like, the conflicts were gonna not make it possible going forward. But by and large, like, it was almost complete overlap in clients. And so that was really attractive.
Sonal Mehta:And I'd been working with Walmart lawyers in, like, a co counsel capacity and had really just a tremendously positive experience. Like, very often when you're a co counsel with, like, another law firm, there's, you know, sharp elbows. There's competition. There's attempts to, like, one up one another in front of the client. And the Wilmer lawyers just there was none of that.
Sonal Mehta:It was, like, really very, very like, we're all one team, like, genuinely, and I was the outsider and felt that way. So that was really attractive to me. And so so I think that was that was the sort of pull to Wilmer. And then from the Weil perspective, like, Weil, you know, still, like, so many of the people that I worked with are there, and it's a it's a still such a wonderful firm. But, you know, I had sort of moved on, and I also think that, you know, maybe this is just some someone said this to me later, and I don't think I was processing it at the time.
Sonal Mehta:But when they said it later, I was like, that could be part of it. They said, you know, wouldn't you be worried that if you moved back to Weil, people would perceive that as a failure? Like, you, like, you tried to go out on your own, and then you couldn't make it. And so then you went back to the comfortable. I never thought that.
Sonal Mehta:That was, like, never in my mind expressly, but maybe that was subconsciously part of it as well.
Khurram Naik:Fair enough. And so I I think part of what I'm interested in is, you know, we've been talking about some of what's made you successful as a lawyer. And I wanna double back to something we were talking earlier on is is we're we're we're we're on the cusp of exploring it. Your core competencies. Like, what would you say are the two or three things that that you feel really drive your success?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I don't I guess, given the way this conversation has gone, it won't surprise anyone to hear that I think my gut and my instincts are are pretty important. I also think god. This is hard. I don't I don't like talking about this sort of stuff because it makes it makes me seem braggy.
Sonal Mehta:But I guess I guess if I were hiring myself, like, I were an in house counsel and I was like, you know, why would I wanna hire Sonal? If I had to come up with a list, I would say, I do think my instincts are pretty good. I think that I am pretty good at figuring out what's gonna matter and what's not gonna matter. Like, if I'm if we're dealing with, like, a complex set of facts or issues or whatever, like again, going back to my gut, like, I usually am like, okay. These things are gonna matter.
Sonal Mehta:We need to spend a lot of time and attention. Like, if it's a litigation, like, these defenses are gonna matter. So we really need to develop our defenses here, or this witness is gonna matter a lot, or this, you know, set of meetings in 2022 was gonna matter a lot. Like, for some reason through gut or whatever experience combination thereof, like, if you kinda lay out everything, I'll be able to tell you usually, like, here are the things that I think are gonna matter in the end. Here are the things that I think are gonna fall away over the course of the case or over the course of the issue that we're dealing with.
Sonal Mehta:So I think that's another reason that if I were an in house lawyer, I might look to me. And then the third is, I may not be the best lawyer, but I do care a lot. Like, there are a lot of really fantastic lawyers out there, and I'm not suggesting that I'm, like, one of the best. But if you hire me for something or if, like, I take on a client's problem, like, I am gonna sweat it to the last detail. I am going to lose sleep over it.
Sonal Mehta:It's gonna be the thing that's in my mind when I'm brushing my teeth in the morning. It's gonna be the thing that's on my mind when I'm driving to the grocery store on Sunday. Like, I, you know, probably in a way that's unhealthy, really, really, really, really care about my matters. And I live and I breathe them, and I they, like, become my life for whatever period of time I am involved in them. And I think they're it's probably unhealthy for me as a person, but it probably does serve my matters well that I'm doing that.
Khurram Naik:I mean, it does make sense because I I don't think anyone can become really good at something if it isn't on their mind twenty four hours. And and frankly, it's something that I realized about this is part of my criteria for being okay with not pursuing patent litigation because I just knew I'm never thinking about an expert report in the shower. I'm just not. And so the things you think about in the shower, I think, are such a great measure of what you're driven by. And so and that's because no one can as far as sitting in front of a laptop and or a computer or whatever and working, there's only so many hours that even the most super, you know, worker can do that.
Khurram Naik:But the real competitive advantage is if that's just always going on in the back of your mind or at some point in the the front of your mind pretty much all day, that's how you really get any kind of competitive advantage in the field.
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I do think that's right, and I think it is. I think it's also sometimes that's where, like, the creative ideas come from. Right? Like, I don't like, yeah, I'm sitting at my desk and, like or we're in a meeting and we're brainstorming something and great ideas come from that, obviously.
Sonal Mehta:Otherwise, we wouldn't have those meetings. But sometimes I'll be, like, in the car going somewhere, and I'll be like, what if we did this crazy thing? And I'll, like, call my colleague and be like, hey. I know this is, like, totally random, but what if we did x, y, or z? And they'll be like, oh my god.
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. And then we could do this. And then it's like that. And it's not even like maybe a concrete thought process. It's not like I was sitting in the car like, okay, now I'm gonna think about this case.
Sonal Mehta:I'm gonna think about, like, what are we gonna do? Just like your mind wanders and it's do it's like doing the thing my mind never shuts off ever. But it's like whatever it's on. Sometimes, like like, most creative things come to me when my mind is, like, just doing it's, like, wandering thing when I'm in the car. And, like and I do think that's really critically important to success because if you're just doing the, like, playbook that we all know and that we do at your desk, like, that's gonna work a lot of the time.
Sonal Mehta:But the, like, a lot of the brilliance, I think, that comes when you see someone do something really brilliant in this profession or any profession is the it's not the playbook. It's something that came up kind of totally out of left field or someone's creative idea, and I aspire to do that as you know, more than I do. I would love to be the person that's, like, always coming up with, like, brilliant creative insights.
Khurram Naik:Tell me about the parts of your work that you enjoy the least. You know, depositions you love. What do you what do you what do you dislike about litigation?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, this has changed, I think, over time, as you might expect, right, as anyone's career changes. I alright. As as careers evolve. You know, when I was a younger lawyer, I used to love discovery, and which is a weird thing to say, I know, but I used to love it.
Sonal Mehta:I used to love the, like, meet and confers with the other side and the letters that you'd write back and forth and, like, the the sort of it was it was, like, fun, and it was, like, outsmarting the other side on a discovery issue. Like, I used to really, really, really enjoy that. And as I have gotten more senior or just older, maybe it's really what it is, like, I just find so much of the back and forth of litigation to be unnecessary and, you know, focused on things that don't really matter. And there's so much posturing that happens, and there's so much lack of civility that goes on. And maybe it's that it's getting getting worse.
Sonal Mehta:Maybe it's just sort of luck of the draw of the people that I'm interacting with. Maybe it's me having less tolerance for that as I get older and grumpier. But I like, that part of this job, I could definitely do with less of. Discovery is necessary, and it's appropriate, and we have to do it. But, you know, a lot of the incentives that people have are really perverse in the discovery context or in litigation generally.
Sonal Mehta:And I find that there's not there's not as much discipline as there needs to be around that. And I and I really it's it's really a shame because I feel it's such a tax on our system, and it's such a black mark on our system that that we all spend so much time and money fighting over things in nonproductive ways, and that people end up then becoming uncivil or completely unreasonable, in that context. So I'd say that's one thing I like less. I hate doing bills and time entry and all that stuff. Like, I I I have said to many people, this job would be perfect if you didn't have to deal with any of the money associated with it.
Sonal Mehta:Like, if I didn't have to go out and, like, do budgets or enter my time or submit bills or follow-up on bills, like, if I was, like, you know, infinitely, independently wealthy and could just be like a litigation partner for free and never had to think about any of the money associated with it in any direction, I'd be very happy.
Khurram Naik:Can you say I mean, there's another role that you've taken on. So you were on the executive committee, which is, you know, I think a lot of responsibility for an institution, an old institution. And so then how do you, I guess a couple questions come to mind is one is and I I've I've talked to other people that are so I've interviewed Mois Kaba, who's managing partner of of Houston Hennigan, and Kalpana Srinivasan, who's the co managing partner of assessment Godfrey. So both are, trial lawyers with a very busy doc app, but then also, in this management capacity. So we we I've explored, the relationship between those two, and so I'm curious for you as well.
Khurram Naik:How do those how does your trial practice inform your approach to being on the the EC and vice versa?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. So, I mean, one thing is I you know, thankfully, I'm just one of many members of our management committee. And so unlike Kalpana and Moe's who have, to balance their trial practices with, like, actually running the firm, we have we have a real managing partner and and deputy managing partner who do do the work along with a tremendously talented executive team that do all the hard work. But, you know, I guess the way I think about it, I'm I'm on the management committee of the firm, and I'm involved in leadership of the litigation department. And I'm also now the partner in charge of Rapel Alto office.
Sonal Mehta:So sort of thinking about management from a few different angles or lenses, I think the way in which my litigation background influences the way I think about management is and I think it really annoys people, to be honest, and probably rightly so. But I ask a lot of questions. Like, a lot of question. I I think the way that my mind works as a litigator is to, like, interrogate everything. And so I'd I'd like you know, we have to make a decision about something.
Sonal Mehta:And my first instinct is, okay. Well, what about this? And what's the basis for that? And where you know, what's the facts that support x, y, and z? And where do we get that data?
Sonal Mehta:And what's the other data? What's the source for that data? Like, I just start to really, like, start all the questions that you would have if you were like a litigator, either, you know, presenting, getting a position ready to present, or if you're the judge and you were sort of going through and trying to make a decision, like, I interrogate everything. Sometimes I interrogate things that probably don't matter, but I just like it's my instinct to ask a lot of questions. And so that's the way I think that my training as a litigator influences the way that I think about management or my role in management because I have a small role amongst a lot of super talented people that have just tremendous judgment and wisdom, and I'm just trying to, like, add some value where I can.
Sonal Mehta:But the way I think about my value is asking all those questions because maybe a lot of them are obvious or a lot of them don't matter. But maybe every once in a while, I will ask a question that is a different way of thinking about it or make sort of an underlying point that someone else hadn't thought about or elicits new information or data that contributes to the conversation in a way that's helpful. So I, like, I don't know if other people would say that's me my value add or if they would say I'm adding any value at all, but I would like to think that if there's value add, that's where it's coming from. And that's all my I mean, that's me as a litigator. That's, like, where that comes from, I think.
Khurram Naik:And conversely, has your role on the management committee influenced how you litigate?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I think it has because I think it is it's maybe not in a way that I could sort of concretely express, but I think it has in a couple of ways sort of subconsciously, at least. One is, I mean, the people that I'm on man the management committee with are people that I might not otherwise get to spend a ton of time with because our management committee includes people from other practice areas and other offices that I wouldn't like, you know, I would know them, but I wouldn't really know them well, and I wouldn't get to work with them. And so I but I get to sit in a room with them and talk to them and hear them at how, you know, how they think about things and how they go about making complicated decisions. And so there's sort of a perspective that I'm able to gain from these, like, incredible lawyers that I would never otherwise get to see that from that I think has really been valuable for me.
Sonal Mehta:And it sort of, you know, I don't know that I would say, like, the last time I had a decision to make it a litigation, I was, like, channeling someone from the management committee. But I do think that, like, we all absorb things that we learn from other people. And being surrounded by these, like, brilliant leaders. I'm I'm I have to be. I know I am absorbing from them, and that's making me better.
Sonal Mehta:So that's one way I think that's been that definitely has helped me in my practice. And then the other thing I think is in the same vein, but it's like taking a step back and thinking about the big picture. Taking a step back and thinking about the perspectives of people that don't have the same experience as you. We always have to do that as as litigators and trial lawyers. Right?
Sonal Mehta:Because we're gonna ultimately have to present our case to a judge or a jury that doesn't have the same perspective that we do or the same information that we do. But I think in when you're thinking about running a firm that is a lot of different people and a lot of different geographies with different practices and different clients, like, every decision you make, you have to sort of affirmatively step back from your own perspective. And while you wanna contribute through your perspective, because the reason we are elected presumably is so that all these different perspectives are reflected, you also have to, like, you know, very consciously say, like, okay. But that's great. But what how does that impact this other office or this other practice area or this other set of clients in this other industry?
Sonal Mehta:And I think as a as a litigator and a trial lawyer, especially someone that's sort of getting more and more senior and sort of dealing more and more with, like, really in in complicated webs of considerations and problems and legal challenges and doing a lot of advising clients even outside the courtroom on those kinds of problems, like the the muscle memory of sort of forcing yourself to take a step back and think about it from the perspective of other constituencies has been really valuable. And I and that came from management, and I think it's now a big part of how I think about how I advise clients as well.
Khurram Naik:What's an example of of of perceiving an issue from multiple constituencies?
Sonal Mehta:So, like, I mean, it it it doesn't even have to be, like, a a a big thing, but, like, different, you know, different practices have, like, different rhythms. So here's an example that every institution in the world is talking about right now, which is, like, return to office. And, you know, how many days a week should we be asking people to be in the office? And I would naturally think about it from my perspective, which is someone that lives in the Bay Area, the people that I work with, the people in the office that I'm with, the people that have the kind of schedules and practice that I have. And so I have views about that based on those experiences.
Sonal Mehta:But then I have to sort of take a step back and think, you know, we have a lot of colleagues at our firm that are transactional lawyers whose rhythms of their job are very different than mine. Like, they don't go away to trial for four weeks. They may actually, like, be in the office every day working at a table with their younger colleagues in a way that litigators who are off a deposition or trial or hearings may not be. Like, that's such a small example. But actually, I had to sort of take a step back and say, okay, like, I can't project my view as someone that's, like, on the road all the time on other people's practices where being in the office is like a meaningfully different experience for them than it might be for me.
Sonal Mehta:And so again, such as like superficial thing, but actually forcing myself to like think about that in an an express way every time I try to think about a decision has been, I think, good for me. It's been good for me to, like, you know, get out of my little self centered sonal universe. It's always good for people to get out of their little self centered universes, but, it's been good for me to practice doing that.
Khurram Naik:And speaking of learning from others and and and and looking outside, for inspiration, is there a firm that you really admire?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, look. There's so many firms that are I admire for so many different things. I was thinking about this question that I predicted that you might ask me this question based on our earlier conversation. And this is like a totally completely, like, apples to orange is comparison, but that's part of why I was thinking about it is you mentioned earlier Culpina and that you that you did an interview with Culpina.
Sonal Mehta:Culpina is co managing partner of Sussman Godfrey, and that firm is so completely different from our firm. And, you know, I think it has to be. Right? Like, system only works if there are firms like that, and there are firms like ours, and they there are different types of matters and different types of clients. And I think we just are operating in different areas of the industry, and the industry needs both.
Sonal Mehta:But I really do respect so much of what a firm like that does in terms of the way that they think about the business, in terms of the way that they think about you know, from what I've observed, I, you know, obviously never worked there. You know, the way they think about recruiting and retaining talent, the way they structure their trial teams, the the tremendous trial successes they've had, the business successes they've had. So, like, we could never be that firm. And, you know, it would make no sense for us to wanna be that firm in every respect, but I do really respect, a lot about sort of what I've observed about that firm from the outside. And I think that the, and I think we should all always look for learnings, from firms that are a lot like ours, but also from firms that are really different to see what parts of the way other people are doing it we can we can steal.
Sonal Mehta:Right? Like, I mean, I you know, it's the it's the highest form of of flattery really to, like, look at another firm or another institution and say, they're doing that really well. We should think about doing that here too. And I don't know that it would be direct with a firm like Sussman, but I think there's indirect learnings that we can gain from that firm and from lots of other firms.
Khurram Naik:And then how about is there a lawyer whose career trajectory you really admire?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I really hope that, like, they don't listen to this. So we're we're gonna try to avoid ever mentioning that I did this podcast so that I don't embarrass them. But, you know, someone that's been really influential in my career is Paul Graywall, who I suspect a lot of your listeners are familiar with. And I knew him when he was on the bench, and I appeared before him as an associate, and have very fond memories of that.
Sonal Mehta:And then I knew him when he was at Facebook and and know him now that he's at Coinbase. And, really, you know, he's been part of this is, like, I'm just I couldn't be more grateful to, Paul than I am. I would say, you know, in terms of impact on my career, he's probably one of the top three most impactful purse people I've ever worked with as a mentor, and he was really largely responsible for my expansion of my practice to move beyond just IP litigation to also covering all types of different litigate complex litigation matters because he really sort of I don't know why, but he gave me my first non IP matter. I can't and I can't imagine why he thought that was a good idea, but he did. And then, you know, and then it sort of grown from there.
Sonal Mehta:So I I a lot of this is, like, gratefulness, but I'm trying to sort of set that aside for a moment and actually objectively think about, like, why I admire him so much. And there's a couple things, I think. And, again, Paul, please don't listen to this. One of them is he is like an he's like the epitome in some ways of the, like, everything's going great, and then you break it anyway and then go do something else. Like, if you think about his career, you know, he's just, like, great IP litigator, and then he goes and he takes the judgeship.
Sonal Mehta:And then he's, like, one of the most well respected judges anywhere in the country. And people just, like, you know, like, were desperate to be in his courtroom as much as possible because they love being in front of him. And he, like, gave that up to go take this, like, really hard complicated job at Facebook. And then he's, like, running litigation at Facebook and is in the thick of it and dealing with all, like, the most sophisticated, most complex legal issues, and it's going great. And then, like, he's gone to c gone to be the CLO at Coinbase and is, like, now in crypto as if it was gonna be easy to be the CLO of Coinbase in the in the current environment relating to crypto.
Sonal Mehta:It's like, you know, it's it's like really hard to walk away from something when it's going great and go into something that's gonna be harder and more uncertain and where you really don't know how it's gonna go. And he's, like, such the epitome of someone that's, like, done that over and over and over again and just jumped in and then, like, killed it when he went to the next place, and I just admire that so much. And then the other thing about him that I really admire is we were talking earlier about civility. He is you know, look. I mean, he's really tough as a judge and a client.
Sonal Mehta:Like, he's super smart. He asks hard questions. He's not giving anyone a free pass, but he's so unfailingly kind. I remember being in his courtroom, and he I was, like, waiting for a discovery hearing or something, and there was a matter before ours. And I think it was, like, I think it was like a traffic violation or parking ticket.
Sonal Mehta:And I think because it was, like, on federal land, it actually went to a federal judge. But, you know, I was there for, like, this massive discovery fight, like, a really consequential discovery fight. It's, like, massive IP litigation, big tech companies, big client you know, big law firms on both sides, high stakes. And then there was, like, a, you know, small matter. It was probably a few $100 at most.
Sonal Mehta:I think it was like parking or something like that. And they were before us, and he was just so respectful to it was an individual. It wasn't even a lawyer. He was so in respectful to the individual, welcomed them to his court, went through the process, gave them full, like, airing of the of the issues, full opportunity, explained the process to them. And I was sort of thinking and then, know, and then he came in and did the exact same thing for our, like, big fancy high stakes patent dispute.
Sonal Mehta:And I was thinking, like, that kindness and respect, which I've seen him have in every context. God, I wish we had more of that. I wish we had more of that in the law. I wish we had more of that in the world. I wish we all had that kind of respect for every single person that we encounter, and I admired that a lot too.
Khurram Naik:Yeah. I I I observed that from a great judge in the Northern District Of Illinois, chief judge James Holderman, who I asked him for. And he, he had, routinely, had people like pro se, and there's a selection factor for the kinds of people that end with pro se. They tend to have no case. They tend to be, shall we say, cranks or or potentially, you know, maybe have got some mental health issues.
Khurram Naik:And I observed just like you're saying that character of with how he approached those people in those conversations in in those in those hearings. And he had said of that, he said, hey. You know, that my approach to this is I can I'm a public servant, and then part one here for is give people an outlet so that they don't take out their anger on the world in some other format. So, that's not I don't I think that was beyond his job. I think he went beyond the call of his job as as just somebody who's genuinely interested in the public well-being and and and policy.
Khurram Naik:It sounds like he's the same way. You know? And I think part of what you're talking about Paul admire is his willingness I think it's betting on yourself and investing in yourself. And so can you share some tips for people that are I guess at any stage of their career, it could be geared more in in terms of people who are more junior. Think all of us at every stage of the career can, are we're all trying to grow something.
Khurram Naik:Right? You talk about business development. That's the frontier for yourself because, you know, you've kind of tapped out these other frontiers. You've taken enough depositions to stay. So we all have something we're developing.
Khurram Naik:So in terms of advice on investing in yourself or betting on yourself, what are what are frameworks or tools that you wanna impart on people for for how to identify opportunities and how to invest in yourself and and and make the bet?
Sonal Mehta:Yeah. I mean, I think I think part of this is just, you know, you have to kind of get comfortable that, you know, you're gonna do things. They're not always gonna work out perfectly, but you've gotta be willing to take risks. And some of the best things that have happened in my career have been risks that I've taken or things that I've done where it was like, I don't know why I'm doing this, but I'm just gonna go with it. And, like, great things can come from that.
Sonal Mehta:And so I think part of betting on yourself is being getting comfortable with the risks. I also think part of it is, you know, it's easier to bet on yourself when you know you have the safety net of support, and I think that comes from mentoring and from people that are your advocates and your supporters. And I've had, like, just I I mean, I can't even begin to talk about how lucky I've gotten in that arena in so many different ways from so many different people at different stages of my career. But the thing I think that is really, at least for me looking back, that's important about that is, you know, it's easy to bet on or easier to bet on yourself when you know you've got those people. And I think you always I think it's easy to have sort of preconceptions about who those people are going to be or what those people are gonna look like.
Sonal Mehta:And I would just urge, especially the younger lawyers, to, like, just don't worry about that. Like, anyone that's willing to invest in you and your career and your development, like, grab that person and be you know, and try to get them to engage with you and try to get them to invest in you as much as possible because if they invest in you and your success, then, you know, it's amazing how much more success you'll have. Right? If all these, like, brilliant successful people are invested in you, they're gonna wanna see you do well, and that's gonna help you. And, you know, for me, like, I didn't have a lot of really any women or people of color as mentors when I was a very young associate, but I had, like, amazing mentors, that were men.
Sonal Mehta:And it was great. They were like they went out of their way to help me in every way possible with no reward for themselves and give me opportunities and and support my career. And, like, if I had been really focused on, like, finding a woman of color mentor and close myself off to that, I would have ended up, like, cutting off all of this tremendous mentorship and support that I got. Or, like, another example is I had this, like, really hard fought case against, another firm, for many years, and there was a senior partner on the other side. And actually, now that I'm thinking about it, this has happened to me twice.
Sonal Mehta:There's a senior partner on the other side who, as much as, like, the cases were hard fought and and litigated really, I I don't wanna say, like, aggressively because they were very civil, but, like, aggressively on the merits, they were litigated. The in both of these cases, the senior partner on the other side, after the case was over, reached out to me and said, they were both men, by the way, and neither were people of color. They're both white men, and they were all a lot older than me. And they both reached out to me a decade apart and said, I think you're really tremendously talented. If there's anything I can ever do to support you in your career, I really hope that you'll reach out to me.
Sonal Mehta:And these were my opposing counsel. Right? And so, like, I just think we should grab that mentorship and that support anywhere that we can get it because it's like it it will allow you to take those risks and bet on yourself.
Khurram Naik:That's good. Well, I think we have a lot of food for thought here. And I think, notwithstanding your initial comments to me, there are very interesting stories and ideas that you have throughout your career. So I'm really glad that we took the time to to explore those with you.
Sonal Mehta:Well, thank you so much for having me. I'm not sure that that's true, but I as I told you when we we first embarked on this, if if there's, you know, even one younger lawyer that list that actually made it all the way through this and listens to it and found a nugget or two that might be helpful to them as they're navigating their career, then it was it was a joy for me to do it, and it was well worth it. And And I'm grateful to you for the time and the opportunity.