. Forum

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, I would take anyone but seward. I have heard they do some shady stealth layoff stuff, becoming a partner is near impossible (everyone laterals after a couple of years), and it is generally less money. And this "lifestyle" bull I keep hearing...it's nyc, you'll be working just as hard/late nights. Don't let a few whiffs of a rumor sway you into thinking this is fabled "midlaw." It's not. That is seriously garbage. It is a small shop with very small dept's...meaning no chance to move around in the firm...

the above disadvantages does not apply to the other three.....at all...so...yeah

I was under the impression that most of the partners were promoted from within the firm. Where did you hear this stuff?

lol yeah, they are, but there are very very few partners. chances are low.

sources: me asking 3Ls on my school's LR and a recent grad

Hmmm, OK. I had just never heard of that lateral stuff or the stealth layoffs. They had 100% offer rates even during 2009 summer (from what I recall).

dude I KNOW they had layoffs. many many firms had 100% (or something really close to) offer rates last year. nothing special.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

for what its worth ive never heard that stuff about seward. actually quite the opposite - every attorney i know that works there is really happy, and i know some people who lateralled in because they disliked biglaw. less money after the first few years is true, but its a tradeoff for lifestyle -> not bull. i havent heard of people lateralling out (although im sure there are those who do) but there is opportunity to move in-house (by choice, not by being squeezed out), im assuming primarily in the hedge fund sector.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Could you please PM me the time between your Seward and Schulte interviews and the offers? Thanks a ton.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Get it?

negative

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, I would take anyone but seward. I have heard they do some shady stealth layoff stuff, becoming a partner is near impossible (everyone laterals after a couple of years), and it is generally less money. And this "lifestyle" bull I keep hearing...it's nyc, you'll be working just as hard/late nights. Don't let a few whiffs of a rumor sway you into thinking this is fabled "midlaw." It's not. That is seriously garbage. It is a small shop with very small dept's...meaning no chance to move around in the firm...

the above disadvantages does not apply to the other three.....at all...so...yeah

Hey, man, I was hoping you might talk a little more about this (you can delete after, if you want). I was really under the impression they had a more balanced lifestyle there. Thanks!

sorry man, im just telling you what I heard. and I heard it was hot air; i.e. hours/work not much different at all than the other sweatshops.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Get it?

negative

Again?

No, but I just sent you a message with my real name. Thanks a ton for the help.

[Anonymous User]

Dechert has international diversification, Kaye Sholer has lit (which is near counter-cyclical), whereas Seward and Schulte are largely tied to a single domestic practice area that may have been substantially damaged by the Dodd-Frank bill.

Thoughts.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Dechert has international diversification, Kaye Sholer has lit (which is near counter-cyclical), whereas Seward and Schulte are largely tied to a single domestic practice area that may have been substantially damaged by the Dodd-Frank bill.

Thoughts.

lol, ty. Nice summary. I thought hedge work was increasing because of the new bill, though.

Could be. I think largely you will see small/mid-sized start-up activity dry up and most of the work go to the largest funds. That could really have negative implications for Seward, which mostly does start-up work, and would likely funnel most of the hedge work at Schulte to partners.

[Anonymous User]

Dechert has international diversification, Kaye Sholer has lit (which is near counter-cyclical), whereas Seward and Schulte are largely tied to a single domestic practice area that may have been substantially damaged by the Dodd-Frank bill.

Thoughts.

lol, ty. Nice summary. I thought hedge work was increasing because of the new bill, though.

Could be. I think largely you will see small/mid-sized start-up activity dry up and most of the work go to the largest funds. That could really have negative implications for Seward, which mostly does start-up work, and would likely funnel most of the hedge work at Schulte to partners.

Full disclosure [same poster]: I want to work at these firms.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Get it?

Did you get a PM from me? Username beings with "s"

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Get it?

Did you get a PM from me? Username beings with "s"

No, I didn't. Strange.

xxxxxx days.

Is that for both?

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Dechert has international diversification, Kaye Sholer has lit (which is near counter-cyclical), whereas Seward and Schulte are largely tied to a single domestic practice area that may have been substantially damaged by the Dodd-Frank bill.

Thoughts.

lol, ty. Nice summary. I thought hedge work was increasing because of the new bill, though.

I find this impossible. Hedge funds are hurting, as is most of finance. Read the latest articles in the economist and nytimes. stuff looks grim. this area was severely injured during the meltdown. The worst part is private equity flees to other countries in crappy times, and will use foreign (i.e. globally based) law firms.

[Anonymous User]

Get it?

Did you get a PM from me? Username beings with "s"

No, I didn't. Strange.

Same guy as before. I didn't see your post. Can you put it [length between Seward callback and offer] up again?