Help me decide: (Simpson v. Kirkland v. Quinn)

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.

For litigation in NYC which firm would you choose?

Simpson Thacher
10
45%
Quinn
4
18%
Kirkland
8
36%
Patterson Belknap
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 22

Anonymous User
Posts: 273075
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Help me decide: (Simpson v. Kirkland v. Quinn)

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Oct 02, 2010 12:09 pm

Focused on NYC. I started off the CB process with Lit-only focus but I am now wavering between Corp. and Lit. I also have interest in IP Lit, but I am not quite sure if I wanted to be boxed into the Patent Lit yet (every firm I talked to tries to box me in already). Here are my thoughts on my options and I would appreciate if you can give me a sense of what you would choose if you were in my shoes.

Factors important to me (in order of preference): Quality of work, Reputation, Exit options, Quality of Life.

Simpson: Obviously, great reputation. I think I would be perfectly fine if I end up choosing Corporate, but their Lit. is concerning since Corp. has such a heavy presence at Simpson. Their IP/Patent Lit is tiny. Somehow I feel like QoL might be better here as compared to some of my other options. People were extremely friendly and nice. The no billable hour requirement sounds nice at least on paper, but in reality probably the number is pretty high anyway.

Kirkland: Obvious Lit. reputations. They wanted me for IP Lit for sure, but after the big departures in their IP dept. I am not sure of their strengths in IP. But still could be great for general Lit. People I met were generally very smart. But K&E's reputation for "free market system", which I read as dog-eat-dog world, kinda scares me given my personality. For some reason, there are lot of people going to K&E in Chicago or DC but none or very few to NYC office from my school.

Quinn: They seem to be on a up-swing. I hear about excessive emphasis on hours (2400?). I am not necessarily shying away from BigLaw hours, but if I had a choice among equally prestigious firms, I would love to have some QoL left. They are also pretty good in IP/Patent Lit at this point and also like their no frills work attire (speaks to my engineer's heart well :)

Patterson Belknap: Was tempted w/ their lean staffing model and their emphasis on Associate training. Seems to be the place with a better QoL, but not sure how much more compared to Simpson or Kirkland or is it worth walking away from some of the other options. People I met very humble and extremely nice. No frills attitude.

Which one would you choose if I have the same options?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273075
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help me decide: (Simpson v. Kirkland v. Quinn)

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Oct 02, 2010 12:22 pm

This is a tough choice. Since you think you might want to do IP lit, despite the partner departures, K&E still has a great roster of IP attorneys and is better at IP lit than the other offices. It's also a place where you can jump out of IP if you really wanted to, but only in the beginning of your career. But, if you truly feel like there's a personality clash, you probably shouldn't go to K&E.

Quinn is like K&E, but more aggressive, and not as good in lit or IP lit in NY. Also notoriously cheap.

Patterson is a great place for young litigators. Chance to get very good experience early on, the quality of life is reportedly tops, and you get a lot of individualized attention as an associate. But the lack of a corporate department might be off-putting to you.

If I had to put my finger on it, I'd say it should be between Simpson and K&E. Simpson has an excellent corporate program, and a decent enough litigation group for you to work in if you want. The culture also seems to fit you more than something super "eat what you kill." K&E is also great at corporate, but not as good as Simpson. Also PE focused, and the firm is aggressively growing in the field. You can also escape to a great litigation group if need be.

I'd have to say: Go to Simpson if you value a personality match over the possibility of going to a litigation group that's not as highly valued, and being part of a firm with an outstanding corporate practice. Go to K&E if you're willing to sacrifice personality-match for a strong litigation group and a not as good, but rising corporate group.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273075
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help me decide: (Simpson v. Kirkland v. Quinn)

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Oct 02, 2010 12:22 pm

I had similar options and chose K&E. I know the free-market system seems aggressive, but I saw it as "being able to choose whatever I want to do" rather than dog-eat-dog. I worked in BigLaw before LS and realistically, your work is going to come from partners with whom you establish relationships - at least in a free-market I can dabble in what interests me and sort of "strike my own path," rather than being pegged down in either Corporate or Lit. :)

User avatar
NewHere
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:19 pm

Re: Help me decide: (Simpson v. Kirkland v. Quinn)

Postby NewHere » Sat Oct 02, 2010 2:27 pm

Quinn: They seem to be on a up-swing. I hear about excessive emphasis on hours (2400?)


Is that true?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.