Anonymous User wrote:Also interested in this...Anonymous User wrote:Also wondering if we can expand this into Atlanta firms
I know K&S has the sweatshop reputation, but beyond that...?
Firms to avoid Forum
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.
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.
- denimchickn
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:57 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
rayiner wrote:In Chicago: Kirkland. They're the only ones that are really doing well right now in that market. People love Sidley for some reason, but I don't see the magic, and they did some epic deferrals.columbia86 wrote:Not to diverge from the topic at hand, but anyone care to identify the most desirable firms in each major market. Rationale should go beyond surface analysis (rankings) and take into consideration the variables that differ from firm to firm.
Selfishly, an emphasis on Chicago would be appreciated.
Chicago is very easy (for Chicago based firms):
1. Kirkland
2. Sidley
3. Mayer or Winston
-Mayer used to be the clear winner, but has been in decline since 07
4. Jenner or McDermott
-Jenner for lit, MWE for anything else
5. Everyone else
Other than Kirkland, none of these firms are doing particularly well though.
- Naked Dude
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:09 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
@ GTL--I'm not well-versed in the ins and outs of different markets. What is "DC Practice"? Just more conservative uh...operations?
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Where's our megapost?
- thesealocust
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
You hire a DC firm to do things like represent you before federal regulators, lobby congress, keep track of changes in the law, etc. Lots of the lit winds up being related to federal agencies. They also do other stuff, even corporate transactions, but the practice that draws lots of lawyers to DC is just fundamentally different from the practice that draws lots of lawyers to, say, NYC.Naked Dude wrote:@ GTL--I'm not well-versed in the ins and outs of different markets. What is "DC Practice"? Just more conservative uh...operations?
As you might imagine, those services in DC are valuable, but the fees will never be as high as for multi-million (or billion) corporate transactions, bet the company securities litigation, etc.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- vamedic03
- Posts: 1577
- Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:50 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Regulatory (e.g., Food and Drug, FCC, etc.), lobbying, DC-centric litigation, etc. Plus, transactional and litigation work that requires specialized regulatory knowledge (life sciences transactional work, insurance-policy holder representation, etc.).Naked Dude wrote:@ GTL--I'm not well-versed in the ins and outs of different markets. What is "DC Practice"? Just more conservative uh...operations?
-
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:45 am
Re: Firms to avoid
There is one huge caveat here: Kirkland is basically a NYC firm, as far as hours expected, how you're worked, etc., and the culture is very "entreprenurial" (i.e., you'd better be ready to eat what you kill, and that includes as an associate rattling down work). It's a great environment for people who will flourish with that kind of self-directedness (and who don't mind Cravath-and-sometimes-Wachtell-style-hours,) but it's absolutely not for everyone.Anonymous User wrote:rayiner wrote:In Chicago: Kirkland. They're the only ones that are really doing well right now in that market. People love Sidley for some reason, but I don't see the magic, and they did some epic deferrals.columbia86 wrote:Not to diverge from the topic at hand, but anyone care to identify the most desirable firms in each major market. Rationale should go beyond surface analysis (rankings) and take into consideration the variables that differ from firm to firm.
Selfishly, an emphasis on Chicago would be appreciated.
Chicago is very easy (for Chicago based firms):
1. Kirkland
2. Sidley
3. Mayer or Winston
-Mayer used to be the clear winner, but has been in decline since 07
4. Jenner or McDermott
-Jenner for lit, MWE for anything else
5. Everyone else
Other than Kirkland, none of these firms are doing particularly well though.
Also a caveat re: Mayer - if you have the creds to be looking to do app lit, they're the only (respectable) shop in town.
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I would avoid Baker Mackenzie. It's a mega firm running on high-volume (rather than high profile) work with each office running as an independent fiefdom. High leverage to boot.
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
ToTransferOrNot wrote:There is one huge caveat here: Kirkland is basically a NYC firm, as far as hours expected, how you're worked, etc., and the culture is very "entreprenurial" (i.e., you'd better be ready to eat what you kill, and that includes as an associate rattling down work). It's a great environment for people who will flourish with that kind of self-directedness (and who don't mind Cravath-and-sometimes-Wachtell-style-hours,) but it's absolutely not for everyone.Anonymous User wrote:
Chicago is very easy (for Chicago based firms):
1. Kirkland
2. Sidley
3. Mayer or Winston
-Mayer used to be the clear winner, but has been in decline since 07
4. Jenner or McDermott
-Jenner for lit, MWE for anything else
5. Everyone else
Other than Kirkland, none of these firms are doing particularly well though.
Also a caveat re: Mayer - if you have the creds to be looking to do app lit, they're the only (respectable) shop in town.
Agreed (which is why I picked #2 on that list).
Re: Mayer and Appellate Lit - I agree. All of these firms have their specialities. For example, if I wanted to do trusts & estates work, I would have totally gone to McDermott over K&E or Sidley (or even Cravath in NYC). MWE is by far the best T&E firm in the country.
-
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 6:48 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I see this phrase thrown around quite a bit -- "bet the firm/company" x type of litigation. Can you explain what this means? I'm curious, thanks.thesealocust wrote: bet the company securities litigation, etc.
- unc0mm0n1
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:06 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
So Skadden Chicago sucks?Anonymous User wrote:rayiner wrote:In Chicago: Kirkland. They're the only ones that are really doing well right now in that market. People love Sidley for some reason, but I don't see the magic, and they did some epic deferrals.columbia86 wrote:Not to diverge from the topic at hand, but anyone care to identify the most desirable firms in each major market. Rationale should go beyond surface analysis (rankings) and take into consideration the variables that differ from firm to firm.
Selfishly, an emphasis on Chicago would be appreciated.
Chicago is very easy (for Chicago based firms):
1. Kirkland
2. Sidley
3. Mayer or Winston
-Mayer used to be the clear winner, but has been in decline since 07
4. Jenner or McDermott
-Jenner for lit, MWE for anything else
5. Everyone else
Other than Kirkland, none of these firms are doing particularly well though.
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
unc0mm0n1 wrote:So Skadden Chicago sucks?Anonymous User wrote:rayiner wrote:In Chicago: Kirkland. They're the only ones that are really doing well right now in that market. People love Sidley for some reason, but I don't see the magic, and they did some epic deferrals.columbia86 wrote:Not to diverge from the topic at hand, but anyone care to identify the most desirable firms in each major market. Rationale should go beyond surface analysis (rankings) and take into consideration the variables that differ from firm to firm.
Selfishly, an emphasis on Chicago would be appreciated.
Chicago is very easy (for Chicago based firms):
1. Kirkland
2. Sidley
3. Mayer or Winston
-Mayer used to be the clear winner, but has been in decline since 07
4. Jenner or McDermott
-Jenner for lit, MWE for anything else
5. Everyone else
Other than Kirkland, none of these firms are doing particularly well though.
Please see the bolded.
Figuring out where the top satellite offices (Skadden, Latham, Jones Day) fit into the Chicago hierarchy is more difficult and practice specific.
- PKSebben
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:35 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
litigation where a poor outcome will end or significantly weaken the company.GMVarun wrote:I see this phrase thrown around quite a bit -- "bet the firm/company" x type of litigation. Can you explain what this means? I'm curious, thanks.thesealocust wrote: bet the company securities litigation, etc.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:48 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Gonna have to wait until after the bar exam. Sorry folks. Should've started studying... oh... before July 4th...quakeroats wrote:Where's our megapost?
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
One of the selling points for the growing NYC practice now is the connection to its DC practice. Corporations can go to Covington and get all their corporate, litigation, and regulatory work handled in one place. This is part of how they're growing the NYC practice and why it's going to be a good place to work going forward. Recently they've stolen a couple of high-dollar corporate contacts recently from other V10 firms by offering this whole package. Going forward this trend will likely continue as they keep trying to expand their NYC office and in particular their corporate and IP practices.thesealocust wrote:You hire a DC firm to do things like represent you before federal regulators, lobby congress, keep track of changes in the law, etc. Lots of the lit winds up being related to federal agencies. They also do other stuff, even corporate transactions, but the practice that draws lots of lawyers to DC is just fundamentally different from the practice that draws lots of lawyers to, say, NYC.Naked Dude wrote:@ GTL--I'm not well-versed in the ins and outs of different markets. What is "DC Practice"? Just more conservative uh...operations?
As you might imagine, those services in DC are valuable, but the fees will never be as high as for multi-million (or billion) corporate transactions, bet the company securities litigation, etc.
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
At the other end of the spectrum Vault announced its "Best firms to work for " today. Note, not necessarily indicative of a particular office
http://www.vault.com/wps/portal/usa/ran ... gYear=2012
VAULT RANKINGS
2012
RANK 2011
RANK
CHANGE
FIRM
SCORE
LOCATION
1 2 Williams & Connolly LLP 8.639 Washington, DC
2 1 Ropes & Gray LLP 8.578 Boston, MA
3 NR Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 8.195 New York, NY
4 NR Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo P.C. 8.184 Boston, MA
5 NR foley hoag LLP 8.140 Boston, MA
6 12 Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP 8.117 Los Angeles, CA
7 NR Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC 8.086 Memphis, TN
8 NR Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP 8.078 New York, NY
9 NR Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP 8.055 New York, NY
10 NR Fish & Richardson P.C. 8.024 Boston, MA
11 NR Patton Boggs LLP 8.007 Washington, DC
12 13 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP 7.998 Washington, DC
13 10 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates 7.994 New York, NY
14 3 Morrison & Foerster LLP 7.972 San Francisco, CA
15 NR Jenner & Block LLP 7.958 Chicago, IL
16 11 Vinson & Elkins LLP 7.948 Houston, TX
17 15 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 7.938 New York, NY
18 NR Latham & Watkins LLP 7.934 New York, NY
19 19 Debevoise & Plimpton LLP 7.932 New York, NY
20 14 Carlton Fields 7.914 Tampa, FL
http://www.vault.com/wps/portal/usa/ran ... gYear=2012
VAULT RANKINGS
2012
RANK 2011
RANK
CHANGE
FIRM
SCORE
LOCATION
1 2 Williams & Connolly LLP 8.639 Washington, DC
2 1 Ropes & Gray LLP 8.578 Boston, MA
3 NR Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 8.195 New York, NY
4 NR Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo P.C. 8.184 Boston, MA
5 NR foley hoag LLP 8.140 Boston, MA
6 12 Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP 8.117 Los Angeles, CA
7 NR Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC 8.086 Memphis, TN
8 NR Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP 8.078 New York, NY
9 NR Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP 8.055 New York, NY
10 NR Fish & Richardson P.C. 8.024 Boston, MA
11 NR Patton Boggs LLP 8.007 Washington, DC
12 13 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP 7.998 Washington, DC
13 10 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates 7.994 New York, NY
14 3 Morrison & Foerster LLP 7.972 San Francisco, CA
15 NR Jenner & Block LLP 7.958 Chicago, IL
16 11 Vinson & Elkins LLP 7.948 Houston, TX
17 15 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 7.938 New York, NY
18 NR Latham & Watkins LLP 7.934 New York, NY
19 19 Debevoise & Plimpton LLP 7.932 New York, NY
20 14 Carlton Fields 7.914 Tampa, FL
- vanwinkle
- Posts: 8953
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am
Re: Firms to avoid
This comment piqued my curiosity when I saw it, so I did some digging.seriouslyinformative wrote:(a) I know former Covington associates who were laid off.
banned.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 20063
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
But I thought he swore he would NEVER COME BACK!
-
- Posts: 609
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:26 am
Re: Firms to avoid
.
Last edited by JusticeJackson on Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Cavalier
- Posts: 1994
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Posting with more than one account. An "alt" is an alternate account. TLS does not allow them, ever.JusticeJackson wrote:what is alting?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Grizz
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Sure they don't.Cavalier wrote:Posting with more than one account. An "alt" is an alternate account. TLS does not allow them, ever.JusticeJackson wrote:what is alting?
- IrwinM.Fletcher
- Posts: 1268
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:55 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
This is really a shame, I was so looking forward to a comprehensive list of firm weaknesses in the world's largest legal market from someone who hasn't actually started as an associate yet.seriouslyinformative wrote:Gonna have to wait until after the bar exam. Sorry folks. Should've started studying... oh... before July 4th...quakeroats wrote:Where's our megapost?
- DeSimone
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:49 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
He's also posted much more helpful and constructive information than you itt.IrwinM.Fletcher wrote:This is really a shame, I was so looking forward to a comprehensive list of firm weaknesses in the world's largest legal market from someone who hasn't actually started as an associate yet.seriouslyinformative wrote:Gonna have to wait until after the bar exam. Sorry folks. Should've started studying... oh... before July 4th...quakeroats wrote:Where's our megapost?
- thesealocust
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
He was helpful and informative in the other era too. Then once people realized what firm he was at he skipped the light fantastic out of town.DeSimone wrote:He's also posted much more helpful and constructive information than you itt.
Last edited by thesealocust on Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login