S&C vs. Simpson

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273187
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

S&C vs. Simpson

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:22 am

Not yet sure if I want to do lit or corp (leaning lit right now), but I definitely want to be surrounded by geniuses (S&C wins?) work in a pretty office (Simpson definitely wins) and have an international practice (tie?).

itbdvorm
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 9:09 am

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby itbdvorm » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:38 am

If really leaning lit, honestly neither...

Anonymous User
Posts: 273187
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:40 am

I think Simpson has a slight edge for litigation.

imchuckbass58
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby imchuckbass58 » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:40 am

If you're leaning lit, Simpson is very securities/general commercial heavy, whereas S&C is very white collar/investigations heavy. Something to take into account.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273187
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:00 am

imchuckbass58 wrote:If you're leaning lit, Simpson is very securities/general commercial heavy, whereas S&C is very white collar/investigations heavy. Something to take into account.

How do you take this into account with no experience in either? Are they radically different practices or just different subject matter?

Any major differences like this on the corporate side?

imchuckbass58
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby imchuckbass58 » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:06 am

Anonymous User wrote:
imchuckbass58 wrote:If you're leaning lit, Simpson is very securities/general commercial heavy, whereas S&C is very white collar/investigations heavy. Something to take into account.

How do you take this into account with no experience in either? Are they radically different practices or just different subject matter?

Any major differences like this on the corporate side?


Well, it's hard to say if you've never done either. If you want to be an AUSA, white collar/investigations is probably more relevant. Securities is probably more relevant if you want to go in-house or work for the SEC or some other financial regulatory agency.

On the corporate side, S&C does a lot of M&A, particularly financial institutions. Simpson also does a lot of M&A, especially private equity M&A, but also has really good PE funds and capital markets groups.

Personally, I would find Simpson's culture more attractive. It's supposed to be more relaxed and nice, whereas S&C is notorious for being hard-charging, type-a, and sometimes pretty brutal.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273187
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:56 pm

imchuckbass58 wrote:Personally, I would find Simpson's culture more attractive. It's supposed to be more relaxed and nice, whereas S&C is notorious for being hard-charging, type-a, and sometimes pretty brutal.

Don't people say the same about Simpson sometimes?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273187
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: S&C vs. Simpson

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
imchuckbass58 wrote:Personally, I would find Simpson's culture more attractive. It's supposed to be more relaxed and nice, whereas S&C is notorious for being hard-charging, type-a, and sometimes pretty brutal.

Don't people say the same about Simpson sometimes?


I'm sure some do - STB is no walk in the park. S&C is pretty notorious though.

I've posted this in other threads, but:
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/24/sul ... te-morale/
--LinkRemoved--

With the charney piece, read less for his allegations and more for other (former) associates' comments on the firm. I swear I have no personal vendetta against S&C, but those pieces make it sound pretty terrible.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.