jarofsoup wrote:A lot has to do with who the firm can sell to their clients. Clients like to see that the person that they are paying 1k+ an hour is from an elite school.
Tanicius wrote:I think it's market pressure. I don't know what kind of work Barlit Beck does, but if it's corporate, that means they have to appeal to the tastes of corporate clients, and corporate clients often want pedigree.
I'm not sure that clients care about legal pedigree. They certainly don't obsess about it like lawyers do.
As an anecdote, my best friend is a relatively knowledgeable person. His employer is a universally known F25; on a yearly basis, he assigns well over seven figures worth of legal work to various firms. We had the following text conversation last Friday night:
Him: you ever heard of [insert super-prestigious V10 firm], nyc office?
Me: yeah, why?
Him: they are representing our borrower. some of their proposed changes are legit, others are way out there. who are these idiots? do they want us to walk away from this deal?
I know it's one guy, but I suspect that, especially outside of NYC, he's probably more of the norm. My guess is that the average employee pushing work to outside counsel couldn't tell you the difference between Cravath, Swaine and Crate & Barrel.
I know his legal department gives him a list of approved law firms for any particular market. In his home market (major secondary market), where he does most of his business, he chooses to use the local, very low V100 even though a V20 known for its obsession with pedigree and grades is one of his approved firms. Says he prefers the V100 people.
As an additional observation about the relevance of pedigree to clients, there are plenty of partners from TTT's with big books of business.