Deciding on a firm

(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: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:52 pm

unless you really know what you want to do i would recommend going to the highest vault firm, especially if its a v10.

i was talking to a alumni of my firm (v15) and she specifically said that while she had no problem finding the exit options she wanted, it was nothing like her friend who worked at skadden, who could pretty much get any job he wanted anywhere.

i think people here are underestimating the value that a powerful brand name has on a resume. as you go lower down the vault rankings i think it gets tricky (like choosing a v40 over a v60 may not be the best choice) but if someone is going to give up going to a v10 i think they should have a realllyy good reason for it. these are white shoe firms that have deep historic ties to ny and a reputation unmatched by others. if given the chance i think the average law student should jump at the chance. i have spoken to a few lawyers who moved in house and they had similar sentiments. a former partner of a midlaw firm advised me to go to a 'historic nyc firm' and strongly advised against working in satellite offices in nyc. obviously this applies to those interested in nyc corporate.

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

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby rayiner » Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:56 pm

quakeroats wrote:
rayiner wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
rayiner wrote:
You got to use some judgment obviously. Satellite offices in any market are usually second-fiddle to home grown ones. But the Vault rankings peg Kirkland and Sidley as the best big firms in Chicago, and Alston and KS in Atlanta.

Again, not saying you should treat them as dispositive, but they do have value.


One problem with the Vault ranking is what it purports to measure (i.e., prestigiousness). Even setting aside how imperfectly they define and measure prestige, the rankings are still nearly useless. Their rankings occasionally correlate with the right firm choice for a given student, but so would darts thrown at a board.


Vault rankings correlate loosely with lots of important indicators: firm RPL, offer rate in 2009, etc. You're greatly understating their utility by comparing them to a dartboard. Look at the V25. If you don't have a pretty specific practice area in mind, you'd do pretty well to go to S&C or STB in NY or Kirkland in Chicago, Covington or W&C in DC, MoFo in SF, Gibson in LA, or Ropes in Boston.


You're picking the firms you like (and adding criteria that Vault doesn't) and forgetting the rest.


I'm not adding criteria. I'm pointing out that Vault ranking is correlated (albeit not perfectly) with important indicators of firm financial health. Because "prestigious" firms (ie: more well known by associates) tend to have more/higher profile work which creates a steadier income stream.

Again, I'm not saying Vault ranking should be the end-all. You shouldn't take Kirkland DC over Covington because of the Vault ranking. However, your comparison of Vault rankings to a dart board is silly. Let's look at Chambers for a few markets:

DC, General Lit:
W&C is Band 1, Hogan, Kirkland, and Wilmer are Band 2. All except Hogan are V20, and Hogan was V25 until this year's freak drop into the 50s after the Lovells merger.

DC, Corporate M&A:
Gibson, Hogan, Kirkland, Latham, and Skadden are all Band 1. All except Hogan are V20.

Illinois, Litigation:
Jenner, Kirkland, and Mayer are Band 1 (leaving out Bartlit). Here it breaks down a bit, since Jenner and Mayer are V50 and ranked higher than V25 Sidley.

Illinois, Corporate M&A:
Kirkland, Latham, Sidley, and Skadden are Band 1. All are V25.

New York, General Lit:
Cravath, DPW, Paul Weiss, Simpson, Skadden, Sullivan, Wachtell. All are V20.

New York, Corporate M&A:
Cravath, DPW, Simpson, Skadden, Sullivan, and Wachtell are Band 1. All are V10.

So the three major legal markets, and the two biggest general practice areas, with good correlation with Vault rankings.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:25 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Ask about the yield from the prior year's summer class. Knowing that about my 2L firm would have changed where I ultimately accepted an offer. I only asked about the offer rate and knowing that approximately 14/15 SAs got offers made me feel better.

It wasn't until I started with the firm that I found out that in that summer class, 3-4 decided not to return to the firm. In addition, roughly half of the second year attorneys had already left. Those are huge red flags, but I never thought to ask about those things. Those numbers can, in a snapshot, give an idea of the culture of the firm in a way that makes it hard for the firm to BS about how wonderful it is. 2Ls and junior associates in this economy don't just choose to not return to a place unless it's incredibly toxic.


Who do you ask for this information? A partner, associate, or recruiting?


I'd ask the hiring partner first, but also ask particularly honest associates you meet during the recruiting process to double check. Sometimes the answers don't match up and that's also a huge red flag.

User avatar
snailio
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 2:40 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby snailio » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:40 am

Image

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:13 am

Quality of life and reasonable face time expectations are important to me. I'd like to be able to leave the office by 6:30 at least a few days a week and then work from home the rest of the night. Are there any sources other than Chambers Associate or Vault to find out which of the firms I have callbacks with are most likely to be a good fit for this?

terribleperson
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:28 pm

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby terribleperson » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:28 am

Anonymous User wrote:Quality of life and reasonable face time expectations are important to me. I'd like to be able to leave the office by 6:30 at least a few days a week and then work from home the rest of the night. Are there any sources other than Chambers Associate or Vault to find out which of the firms I have callbacks with are most likely to be a good fit for this?


http://www.top-law-schools.com/law-stud ... icles.html

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:47 am

rayiner wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
rayiner wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
You got to use some judgment obviously. Satellite offices in any market are usually second-fiddle to home grown ones. But the Vault rankings peg Kirkland and Sidley as the best big firms in Chicago, and Alston and KS in Atlanta.

Again, not saying you should treat them as dispositive, but they do have value.

One problem with the Vault ranking is what it purports to measure (i.e., prestigiousness). Even setting aside how imperfectly they define and measure prestige, the rankings are still nearly useless. Their rankings occasionally correlate with the right firm choice for a given student, but so would darts thrown at a board.


Vault rankings correlate loosely with lots of important indicators: firm RPL, offer rate in 2009, etc. You're greatly understating their utility by comparing them to a dartboard. Look at the V25. If you don't have a pretty specific practice area in mind, you'd do pretty well to go to S&C or STB in NY or Kirkland in Chicago, Covington or W&C in DC, MoFo in SF, Gibson in LA, or Ropes in Boston.


You're picking the firms you like (and adding criteria that Vault doesn't) and forgetting the rest.


I'm not adding criteria. I'm pointing out that Vault ranking is correlated (albeit not perfectly) with important indicators of firm financial health. Because "prestigious" firms (ie: more well known by associates) tend to have more/higher profile work which creates a steadier income stream.

Again, I'm not saying Vault ranking should be the end-all. You shouldn't take Kirkland DC over Covington because of the Vault ranking. However, your comparison of Vault rankings to a dart board is silly. Let's look at Chambers for a few markets:

DC, General Lit:
W&C is Band 1, Hogan, Kirkland, and Wilmer are Band 2. All except Hogan are V20, and Hogan was V25 until this year's freak drop into the 50s after the Lovells merger.

DC, Corporate M&A:
Gibson, Hogan, Kirkland, Latham, and Skadden are all Band 1. All except Hogan are V20.

Illinois, Litigation:
Jenner, Kirkland, and Mayer are Band 1 (leaving out Bartlit). Here it breaks down a bit, since Jenner and Mayer are V50 and ranked higher than V25 Sidley.

Illinois, Corporate M&A:
Kirkland, Latham, Sidley, and Skadden are Band 1. All are V25.

New York, General Lit:
Cravath, DPW, Paul Weiss, Simpson, Skadden, Sullivan, Wachtell. All are V20.

New York, Corporate M&A:
Cravath, DPW, Simpson, Skadden, Sullivan, and Wachtell are Band 1. All are V10.

So the three major legal markets, and the two biggest general practice areas, with good correlation with Vault rankings.


The Chambers rankings are a better metric, so why use Vault at all? To take NYC M&A as an example, Chambers ranks as follows:

Band 1
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Band 2
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Band 3
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Band 4
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Band 5
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Vault is more correct here than for other practice areas, and it's still pretty far off (i.e., you should take Shearman over Kirkland over Paul Weiss). Fried Frank, Willkie, and Dewey aren't even in the V25, but W&C, Covington, Quinn, White & Case, A&P, WilmerHale, MoFo, and Ropes are. Vault is no better for gauging fit, hours requirements, exit options into particular career paths, firm culture, or much else of significance. I'd argue that it's best to ignore Vault rankings entirely, but your position is still a lot better than the typical law student's. Plenty of people seem content to take the higher ranked firm over the lower every time.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 11:14 am

Anonymous User wrote:unless you really know what you want to do i would recommend going to the highest vault firm, especially if its a v10.


Are there any differences in terms of exit opportunities within the v10 or the v5?

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby RVP11 » Sun Aug 28, 2011 11:55 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:unless you really know what you want to do i would recommend going to the highest vault firm, especially if its a v10.


Are there any differences in terms of exit opportunities within the v10 or the v5?


Image

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

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby rayiner » Sun Aug 28, 2011 12:19 pm

quakeroats wrote:
The Chambers rankings are a better metric, so why use Vault at all? To take NYC M&A as an example, Chambers ranks as follows:

Band 1
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Band 2
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Band 3
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Band 4
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Band 5
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Vault is more correct here than for other practice areas, and it's still pretty far off (i.e., you should take Shearman over Kirkland over Paul Weiss). Fried Frank, Willkie, and Dewey aren't even in the V25, but W&C, Covington, Quinn, White & Case, A&P, WilmerHale, MoFo, and Ropes are. Vault is no better for gauging fit, hours requirements, exit options into particular career paths, firm culture, or much else of significance. I'd argue that it's best to ignore Vault rankings entirely, but your position is still a lot better than the typical law student's. Plenty of people seem content to take the higher ranked firm over the lower every time.


There are a lot of Chambers practice areas, and most students don't know any more than lit or corp. I think you'd be silly, for example, to take Shearman over Kirkland, which is reflected in Vault. And again, even with Vault you have to take regional issues (NY versus DC) into account. Finally, while Vault won't tell you about fit or firm culture, you have firm visits for that. Nobody suggested using Vault as the only metric. It won't tell you much about exit options either, but law students have almost zero insight into such information anyway.

Again, I'm taking issue with your "Vault has zero utility" stance. The rankings are pretty good at identifying the top firms in various markets, and I think that it measures something real. I'd caution against choosing a firm based on a Chambers in some specific practice area. As a 2L you can't be sure what you'll like. I'd also caution against buying wholesale what people you meet tell you about "firm culture" or "hours requirements." Not because I think those considerations are less important than how well regarded the firm is, but because those factors are determined first by market choice and next mostly by luck (practice group, etc). I think some of the anti-Vault CW about firm culture leads people to some stupid positions (eg. Don't even consider S&C over DPW).

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 12:43 pm

rayiner wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
The Chambers rankings are a better metric, so why use Vault at all? To take NYC M&A as an example, Chambers ranks as follows:

Band 1
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Band 2
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Band 3
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Band 4
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Band 5
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Vault is more correct here than for other practice areas, and it's still pretty far off (i.e., you should take Shearman over Kirkland over Paul Weiss). Fried Frank, Willkie, and Dewey aren't even in the V25, but W&C, Covington, Quinn, White & Case, A&P, WilmerHale, MoFo, and Ropes are. Vault is no better for gauging fit, hours requirements, exit options into particular career paths, firm culture, or much else of significance. I'd argue that it's best to ignore Vault rankings entirely, but your position is still a lot better than the typical law student's. Plenty of people seem content to take the higher ranked firm over the lower every time.


There are a lot of Chambers practice areas, and most students don't know any more than lit or corp. I think you'd be silly, for example, to take Shearman over Kirkland, which is reflected in Vault. And again, even with Vault you have to take regional issues (NY versus DC) into account. Finally, while Vault won't tell you about fit or firm culture, you have firm visits for that. Nobody suggested using Vault as the only metric. It won't tell you much about exit options either, but law students have almost zero insight into such information anyway.

Again, I'm taking issue with your "Vault has zero utility" stance. The rankings are pretty good at identifying the top firms in various markets, and I think that it measures something real. I'd caution against choosing a firm based on a Chambers in some specific practice area. As a 2L you can't be sure what you'll like. I'd also caution against buying wholesale what people you meet tell you about "firm culture" or "hours requirements." Not because I think those considerations are less important than how well regarded the firm is, but because those factors are determined first by market choice and next mostly by luck (practice group, etc). I think some of the anti-Vault CW about firm culture leads people to some stupid positions (eg. Don't even consider S&C over DPW).


I think that sort of statement is exactly what's wrong with a vault-influenced line of thought. For example, if you're looking for internationally integrated M&A that isn't overly reliant on PE or a midwestern mothership for work, you probably wouldn't go with Kirkland. Ditto certain brands of Capital Markets and Latin America work. I doubt most students will make it that far--we haven't covered 1/10 of the things one should consider before selecting a firm--because V25 sounds terrible when you can have V10.

User avatar
FlightoftheEarls
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby FlightoftheEarls » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:09 pm

quakeroats wrote:I think that sort of statement is exactly what's wrong with a vault-influenced line of thought. For example, if you're looking for internationally integrated M&A that isn't overly reliant on PE or a midwestern mothership for work, you probably wouldn't go with Kirkland. Ditto certain brands of Capital Markets and Latin America work. I doubt most students will make it that far--we haven't covered 1/10 of the things one should consider before selecting a firm--because V25 sounds terrible when you can have V10.

Who are you, and what the hell have you done with the quakeroats who adamantly made infamous law school rankings based on V10 associates?!

I don't know why, but seeing your statements favoring Chambers rankings over Vault is making me very happy today. For an even better breakdown of the Chambers Corporate/M&A rankings, people should consider looking to the actual M&A league tables. They don't reflect for overall firm size which makes them slightly difficult to rely on, but they give an even more precise picture of which firms are the big players in the area: http://www.mergermarket.com/pdf/Press-Release-for-Legal-Advisers-H1-2011.pdf. Check out page 16's Value table for the "general" firm-wide rankings, and page 34 for USA only.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:10 pm

rayiner wrote:Vault rankings correlate loosely with lots of important indicators: firm RPL, offer rate in 2009, etc. You're greatly understating their utility by comparing them to a dartboard. Look at the V25. If you don't have a pretty specific practice area in mind, you'd do pretty well to go to S&C or STB in NY or Kirkland in Chicago, Covington or W&C in DC, MoFo in SF, Gibson in LA, or Ropes in Boston.


If I'm deciding between the V5, STB and Cleary in NY, with a strong inclination toward general corporate but without a specific practice area in mind, what criteria do you think I should use to distinguish among them besides firm culture and associate collegiality (which seem to tilt towards DPW and Cleary). Is there honestly any difference in exit options between these firms or notable training differences? What about QoL? I assume DPW and Cleary offer slightly saner hours than the other V5.

For what it's worth, I'd like to eventually lateral over to SF.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:18 pm

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:
quakeroats wrote: V25 sounds terrible when you can have V10.

I mean, maybe, but who cares how it "sounds"? 2Ls should get that they are going to spend much, much, much more time doing their jobs than talking about them. Thus, their decisions should be driven by things that affect how their jobs function rather than how they sound. I do not think you take issue with this, based on the very thoughtful debatate above, but it bears repeating anyhow.


I don't take issue with it at all. In fact, that's pretty much the point I was making.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:25 pm

FlightoftheEarls wrote:Who are you, and what the hell have you done with the quakeroats who adamantly made infamous law school rankings based on V10 associates?!


I'm advocating not taking them into account in decision making, however, I suspect that most--perhaps almost all--people that want Biglaw and can get into V25 firms will and will go as high as they can. Assuming I'm right, Vault rankings are actually pretty good at measuring how well schools place their students, because students slavishly follow them.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
rayiner wrote:Vault rankings correlate loosely with lots of important indicators: firm RPL, offer rate in 2009, etc. You're greatly understating their utility by comparing them to a dartboard. Look at the V25. If you don't have a pretty specific practice area in mind, you'd do pretty well to go to S&C or STB in NY or Kirkland in Chicago, Covington or W&C in DC, MoFo in SF, Gibson in LA, or Ropes in Boston.


If I'm deciding between the V5, STB and Cleary in NY, with a strong inclination toward general corporate but without a specific practice area in mind, what criteria do you think I should use to distinguish among them besides firm culture and associate collegiality (which seem to tilt towards DPW and Cleary). Is there honestly any difference in exit options between these firms or notable training differences? What about QoL? I assume DPW and Cleary offer slightly saner hours than the other V5.

For what it's worth, I'd like to eventually lateral over to SF.


Get off this board and spend what remains of your 28 days trying to figure out what you want and who offers most of it. Read Chambers Associate/Partner profiles as a starting point. Next go through your alumni database and call people who work(ed) at each firm. Tell them what you're thinking and see what they have to say. Talk to professors that have practiced in the fields you find interesting. You'll get very little of value on this point hanging around here. TLS can get you into law school and help you do well, but from there you're on your own.

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

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby rayiner » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:33 pm

quakeroats wrote:
rayiner wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
The Chambers rankings are a better metric, so why use Vault at all? To take NYC M&A as an example, Chambers ranks as follows:

Band 1
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Band 2
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Latham & Watkins LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Band 3
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Band 4
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Band 5
Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

Vault is more correct here than for other practice areas, and it's still pretty far off (i.e., you should take Shearman over Kirkland over Paul Weiss). Fried Frank, Willkie, and Dewey aren't even in the V25, but W&C, Covington, Quinn, White & Case, A&P, WilmerHale, MoFo, and Ropes are. Vault is no better for gauging fit, hours requirements, exit options into particular career paths, firm culture, or much else of significance. I'd argue that it's best to ignore Vault rankings entirely, but your position is still a lot better than the typical law student's. Plenty of people seem content to take the higher ranked firm over the lower every time.


There are a lot of Chambers practice areas, and most students don't know any more than lit or corp. I think you'd be silly, for example, to take Shearman over Kirkland, which is reflected in Vault. And again, even with Vault you have to take regional issues (NY versus DC) into account. Finally, while Vault won't tell you about fit or firm culture, you have firm visits for that. Nobody suggested using Vault as the only metric. It won't tell you much about exit options either, but law students have almost zero insight into such information anyway.

Again, I'm taking issue with your "Vault has zero utility" stance. The rankings are pretty good at identifying the top firms in various markets, and I think that it measures something real. I'd caution against choosing a firm based on a Chambers in some specific practice area. As a 2L you can't be sure what you'll like. I'd also caution against buying wholesale what people you meet tell you about "firm culture" or "hours requirements." Not because I think those considerations are less important than how well regarded the firm is, but because those factors are determined first by market choice and next mostly by luck (practice group, etc). I think some of the anti-Vault CW about firm culture leads people to some stupid positions (eg. Don't even consider S&C over DPW).


I think that sort of statement is exactly what's wrong with a vault-influenced line of thought. For example, if you're looking for internationally integrated M&A that isn't overly reliant on PE or a midwestern mothership for work, you probably wouldn't go with Kirkland. Ditto certain brands of Capital Markets and Latin America work. I doubt most students will make it that far--we haven't covered 1/10 of the things one should consider before selecting a firm--because V25 sounds terrible when you can have V10.


If you have specific preferences to the point where you care about whether a practice is more heavily reliant on PE versus strategic acquisitions you should definitely let that guide you. If you're a typical 2L and just want lit or corp (or, gasp, you're unsure which), Kirkland is probably a better bet. Moreover, things that Vault measures, such as whether a firm is perceived as being on an upswing or a downswing, is probably more important to you then the precise mix of work.

As for the league tables, I'd be careful relying on them overly much. I'd be wary of taking, say Freshfields NY or DLA NY over Milbank, for example. This stuff matters more to partners than associates.

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:32 pm

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:
quakeroats wrote:Vault rankings are actually pretty good at measuring how well schools place their students, because students slavishly follow them.

This suggests that people who want to work in LA, SF, Chi, or DC would give up the best firm in those markets to work at a higher Vault ranked firm in NY. Surely you do not agree with that. So perhaps your statement would have some meaning if you said "Vault rankings are actually pretty good at measuring how well schools place their students in NYC, because students who want to work in NYC slavishly follow them."


I hope it isn't the case and the only stats I've ever stood behind are for New York, but I give you exhibit A:


Anonymous User wrote:I am fortunate enough to have offers at both WilmerHale DC and Cleary DC. I still have CB's with firms that could really shake things up for me (Boies DC, Weil NY and Skadden LA); but assuming that these are my only two offers, I could use some input as to what might be the right choice.

I enjoyed both firms when I visited. I do think that I clicked better with the Wilmer folks. I also just liked their offices better.

I am interested in complex commercial lit, antitrust, white collar and international arbitration. I think I am in it for the long haul, though I would like to move in and our of government later in my career.

I have to admit I am doing some prestige whoring here... the strength of the Cleary brand really appeals to me (though it seems that WH has a much stronger DC presence). What else should really drive my decision when it comes to these two firms?

Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:45 pm

What would all of you crack firm deciders think about choosing between Gibson LA and Cleary DC?

User avatar
Cavalier
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Cavalier » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:46 pm

...
Last edited by Cavalier on Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:47 pm

Cavalier wrote:If you are 100% committed to antitrust probably Cleary, otherwise definitely Wilmer.



And what about Gibson LA v. Cleary DC?

User avatar
quakeroats
Posts: 1399
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby quakeroats » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:What would all of you crack firm deciders think about choosing between Gibson LA and Cleary DC?


What do you want to do with your life?

User avatar
Cavalier
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Cavalier » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:50 pm

...
Last edited by Cavalier on Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:52 pm

quakeroats wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:What would all of you crack firm deciders think about choosing between Gibson LA and Cleary DC?


What do you want to do with your life?


For your purposes, let's say maximize exit options.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273385
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Deciding on a firm

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:What would all of you crack firm deciders think about choosing between Gibson LA and Cleary DC?


What do you want to do with your life?


For your purposes, let's say maximize exit options.


I'm a Californian, but I didn't even know Cleary had a DC office. Gibson is, without a doubt, one of the top firms in California. Pretty sure I could name a number of DC firms that outclass Cleary in DC. Seems clear to me...




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.