Firms to avoid

(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.
User avatar
dood
Posts: 1639
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:59 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby dood » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:41 pm

quakeroats wrote:I've heard Cravath is living on its reputation from the 80s and 90s. My information is second hand, so I can't vouch for accuracy.


thank god i read this poast. i was about to accept an offer there.

OnceUponAMemo
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:25 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby OnceUponAMemo » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:43 pm

Interesting in hearing more, especially about the negative rep re: Hogan Lovells that a poster mentioned earlier?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:OMM is the only place I would really strongly counsel against. There's no guarantee that they will go Howrey, but there's just no point of taking that risk when, if you can get an offer from OMM, you can also get an offer from their peer firms. And the risk of OMM collapsing does seem real.

Cadwalader does get a bad rap as to their treatment of associates--no personal experience, just chiming in to say that this thread is not the only time you'll hear bad things about them. That said, it probably varies from group to group, and their hours requirement is not really any different from their peers.

Latham, well, it's hard to know. Certainly they fucked over a lot of people with their surprise layoffs, especially of first-year associates, but, on the other hand, having laid off so many people, they probably won't do so again soon (simply because they've slimmed down a lot and don't have much fat to cut). Probably not bad as a short-term option, and due to the stigma Latham may be easier to get than its peers.

Other firms that had big layoffs include White & Case and basically all of the Magic Circle firms' NYC offices, but none were so cruel about it as Latham, and otherwise similar logic (that layoffs are unlikely to happen soon because they've been greatly deleveraged) applies.


At my cwt callback the associate started dropping the f-bomb all over the place.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:55 pm

Renzo wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
This is particularly amusing given that Cadwalader has failed to become more financially successful than its peers.


That depends on how you count it's peers. They are consistently in the top 10 in per partner profits, and nowhere near the top ten in any survey or league table (other than securitization transactions). So they are beating the snot out of a ton of firms in terms of profitability.


Only because PEP is a retarded measure. They perform right around rank when looking at RPL or average partner compensation.

liLtuneChi
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu May 19, 2011 8:28 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby liLtuneChi » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:56 pm

thesealocust wrote:Just for the record: All of these places involve people who earn 6 (and 7) figure salaries while practicing major corporate law (be it transactional, litigation, or government affairs based). You can shit on DLA or any other firm, whether or not you have the creds to work there, but realize that in the grand scheme of things they're all pretty major businesses and ANY firm with a summer program and 6 figure salaries is in the big leagues. Just because some of the leagues are even bigger doesn't mean there aren't dozens of thousands of law students every year who would trades a testical or a limb or two for such an opportunity, and there are great attorneys working at every firm listed here.

Yes, if you have options some of these firms might raise red flags, but the mob mentality ITT is a little out of hand.


well now we know who goes to a TTT firm

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:59 pm

quakeroats wrote:I've heard Cravath is living on its reputation from the 80s and 90s. My information is second hand, so I can't vouch for accuracy.


Cravath made some missteps in hiring, but $3m+ PPP in a strict lockstep p-ship with no non-equity partners and amazing RPL don't lie.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby 98234872348 » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:00 am

:
Last edited by 98234872348 on Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby thesealocust » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:07 am

liLtuneChi wrote:
thesealocust wrote:Just for the record: All of these places involve people who earn 6 (and 7) figure salaries while practicing major corporate law (be it transactional, litigation, or government affairs based). You can shit on DLA or any other firm, whether or not you have the creds to work there, but realize that in the grand scheme of things they're all pretty major businesses and ANY firm with a summer program and 6 figure salaries is in the big leagues. Just because some of the leagues are even bigger doesn't mean there aren't dozens of thousands of law students every year who would trades a testical or a limb or two for such an opportunity, and there are great attorneys working at every firm listed here.

Yes, if you have options some of these firms might raise red flags, but the mob mentality ITT is a little out of hand.


well now we know who goes to a TTT firm


I love law students. So much. You bring such joy to my heart I have made an avatar for you.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:13 am

Cravath is in a decline in the sense it's now clearly second to wlrk and a SullCrom peer, as opposed to arguably #1 as it used to be. That has more to do with the rise of wlrk and s&c's insanely good execution this decade (propped up by the GS relationship) then a weakening of the fundamentals at Cravath.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:18 am

Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

User avatar
GeePee
Posts: 1273
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby GeePee » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:26 am

Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby thesealocust » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:29 am

GeePee wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.


Seriously? I've heard from people that K&E is one of the most cut-throat environments in biglaw. Not only are bonuses strictly tied to hours worked, but it's a firm, from what I hear, that prides itself on 'eat what you kill' / self serve / free market staffing. Still a great firm, but I can see why somebody would put it in that group, at least based on reputation.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:29 am

GeePee wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.


You mean in all your many years of working there you haven't heard any complaints? Just like everyone else I'm telling you what I've heard from the inside, ask people who work there and form your own opinion.

TheFriendlyBarber
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:13 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby TheFriendlyBarber » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:30 am

GeePee wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.


You are woefully uninformed. It's not interesting at all. K&E is a festering turd furnace.

User avatar
GeePee
Posts: 1273
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby GeePee » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:36 am

thesealocust wrote:
GeePee wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.


Seriously? I've heard from people that K&E is one of the most cut-throat environments in biglaw. Not only are bonuses strictly tied to hours worked, but it's a firm, from what I hear, that prides itself on 'eat what you kill' / self serve / free market staffing. Still a great firm, but I can see why somebody would put it in that group, at least based on reputation.

I've certainly heard that some people don't fit into the free market assignment environment, but it's weird -- the people I've spoken with are never those people (with a non-negligible sample size at this point). It's led me to come to the conclusion that there are a small contingent of associates that strongly and vocally dislike the workplace environment, but most people know what they're getting into due to the well-advertised system and therefore feel somewhat comfortable. That conclusion may not be warranted, but I'm slanted in that direction.

That said, I understand where you're coming from.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:39 am

Apparently it sucks to work at Paul Hastings too.

User avatar
GeePee
Posts: 1273
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 7:35 pm

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby GeePee » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:40 am

ITT: We slowly name every law firm, and come to the conclusion that working in biglaw kind of sucks.

User avatar
Shaggier1
Posts: 720
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:57 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Shaggier1 » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:41 am

Seriously? I've heard from people that K&E is one of the most cut-throat environments in biglaw. Not only are bonuses strictly tied to hours worked, but it's a firm, from what I hear, that prides itself on 'eat what you kill' / self serve / free market staffing. Still a great firm, but I can see why somebody would put it in that group, at least based on reputation.


I second the bolded above. I know several SA's and one associate there. I hear frighteningly bad things.

TheFriendlyBarber
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:13 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby TheFriendlyBarber » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:45 am

GeePee wrote:ITT: We slowly name every law firm, and come to the conclusion that working in biglaw kind of sucks.


Some say hiring Goe, Dahun & Suhk LLP can be a pleasurable experience. Can't imagine working there is all that fun. Although a surprising amount of former Cleary associates have reportedly latteraled there, so go figure.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:45 am

thesealocust wrote:
GeePee wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Orrick is apparently in bad financial shape. McDermott, Will & Emery I think does not pay associates market anymore. White & Case is also supposedly unstable.

With respect to associate abuse, the firms I've heard are worst are Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis, K&L Gates, Dechert, Cadwalader, and Greenberg Traurig. Talk to your 3L friends before OCI and see what they say, I think that's the best way to get an idea of how these places are.

Interesting, I'd never heard K&E in this group before. Not really sure it belongs there.


Seriously? I've heard from people that K&E is one of the most cut-throat environments in biglaw. Not only are bonuses strictly tied to hours worked, but it's a firm, from what I hear, that prides itself on 'eat what you kill' / self serve / free market staffing. Still a great firm, but I can see why somebody would put it in that group, at least based on reputation.


I wouldn't compare Kirkland with Cadwalader. Kirkland, at least Kirkland Chicago, is a very polite place. It's highly competitive, but it's because people are out to win (double-market bonus, great exit options, etc). At Cadwalader, people are competitive just to avoid losing.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Renzo » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:07 am

imchuckbass58 wrote:
Renzo wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
This is particularly amusing given that Cadwalader has failed to become more financially successful than its peers.


That depends on how you count it's peers. They are consistently in the top 10 in per partner profits, and nowhere near the top ten in any survey or league table (other than securitization transactions). So they are beating the snot out of a ton of firms in terms of profitability.


No they are not:

http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... 2491847439


Snap, you're right.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... r2011.html
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft has reported a decline in revenue for the fourth consecutive year


Although, after four years of decline PPP is still $2.3 mm. So the partnership is doing alright.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby rayiner » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:17 am

Renzo wrote:
imchuckbass58 wrote:
Renzo wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
This is particularly amusing given that Cadwalader has failed to become more financially successful than its peers.


That depends on how you count it's peers. They are consistently in the top 10 in per partner profits, and nowhere near the top ten in any survey or league table (other than securitization transactions). So they are beating the snot out of a ton of firms in terms of profitability.


No they are not:

http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleTA ... 2491847439


Snap, you're right.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... r2011.html
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft has reported a decline in revenue for the fourth consecutive year


Although, after four years of decline PPP is still $2.3 mm. So the partnership is doing alright.


Cadwalader achieves high PPP by culling equity partner ranks: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... lader.html

Of course culling profitable partners just to juice PPP leads to declining revenue, which necessitates cutting more to keep juicing PPP, etc.

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Renzo » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:23 am

rayiner wrote:
Cadwalader achieves high PPP by culling equity partner ranks: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... lader.html

Of course culling profitable partners just to juice PPP leads to declining revenue, which necessitates cutting more to keep juicing PPP, etc.


Yeah. I talked to some junior associates/school alumni who said it's nowhere near as bad as its reputation while you're junior. But it does seems like an insane bloodsport among the partners, as they poach rainmakers with promises of lucre and throw other people overboard to make room.

TheFriendlyBarber
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:13 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby TheFriendlyBarber » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:26 am

Renzo wrote:
rayiner wrote:
Cadwalader achieves high PPP by culling equity partner ranks: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... lader.html

Of course culling profitable partners just to juice PPP leads to declining revenue, which necessitates cutting more to keep juicing PPP, etc.


Yeah. I talked to some junior associates/school alumni who said it's nowhere near as bad as its reputation while you're junior. But it does seems like an insane bloodsport among the partners, as they poach rainmakers with promises of lucre and throw other people overboard to make room.


So, in other words, the ship be sinking?

Renzo
Posts: 4265
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am

Re: Firms to avoid

Postby Renzo » Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:38 am

TheFriendlyBarber wrote:
Renzo wrote:
rayiner wrote:
Cadwalader achieves high PPP by culling equity partner ranks: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... lader.html

Of course culling profitable partners just to juice PPP leads to declining revenue, which necessitates cutting more to keep juicing PPP, etc.


Yeah. I talked to some junior associates/school alumni who said it's nowhere near as bad as its reputation while you're junior. But it does seems like an insane bloodsport among the partners, as they poach rainmakers with promises of lucre and throw other people overboard to make room.


So, in other words, the ship be sinking?

No, it really seems to work for them. They continue to draw in megarainmakers with big business portfolios. You just don't want to be one of those partners who suddenly finds that all his mega-cases settled, or his industry died, or his big client merged and went with another firm. They'll slit your throat and sell your corpse to science, rather than take a smaller paycheck.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.