goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

(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.

which firm should I pick?

goodwin procter
8
15%
cadwalader
6
11%
winston strawn
10
19%
cahill
20
38%
proskauer
9
17%
 
Total votes: 53

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:32 pm

in nyc. thoughts?
not concerned about marginal differences in hours, nor partnership track stuff
interested in lit, but not set on it
priorities: cool/fun/laid back people to work with, tolerable place to spend 12 hours a day, good benefits, interesting work (to the extent that it's possible in at least the first few years), exit options not confined to NYC

thanks in advance

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:33 pm

When were your Proskauer CB and offer?

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby quakeroats » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:37 pm

Cahill and Proskauer should be at the top. Cadwalader is at the bottom.

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby OnceUponAMemo » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:42 pm

To above poster, care to give reasons why? Especially for winston/cadwalader?

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby quakeroats » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:54 pm

OnceUponAMemo wrote:To above poster, care to give reasons why? Especially for winston/cadwalader?


Cadwalader has a reputation. To give you an idea, at least two people who mentioned their callbacks in the cadwalader thread said associates they interviewed with mentioned that they shouldn't work there.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:58 pm

Had a cb at cadwalader and even though some people were very unenthusiastic, third and fourth years were telling me how they have already been running deals (with, of course, minimal partner supervision). I got the idea that life there is entirely a function of the partner you're working for (in a very feudal way), but that the responsibility and opportunities to do cool things are there if you're willing to put in the work to get them.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:06 pm

W&S or GP.

Cahill is cutthroat, Cadwalader is awful (doesn't anyone remember the comment during OCI 2009 that the bottom of YLS had to settle for CWT, and that was emblematic of the troubled economy?), and Proskauer's NY office is losing significant amounts of corporate work to its other offices, which is never a good sign.

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby quakeroats » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Had a cb at cadwalader and even though some people were very unenthusiastic, third and fourth years were telling me how they have already been running deals (with, of course, minimal partner supervision). I got the idea that life there is entirely a function of the partner you're working for (in a very feudal way), but that the responsibility and opportunities to do cool things are there if you're willing to put in the work to get them.


Remember that interviewers are selected. They're generally the happiest associates at the firm. This is by no means the only issue.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:31 pm

At my school's OCI, the Cadwalader DC interviewers openly told some students how horrible working in the NY office was and how much happier they were to be in DC.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:58 pm

quakeroats wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Had a cb at cadwalader and even though some people were very unenthusiastic, third and fourth years were telling me how they have already been running deals (with, of course, minimal partner supervision). I got the idea that life there is entirely a function of the partner you're working for (in a very feudal way), but that the responsibility and opportunities to do cool things are there if you're willing to put in the work to get them.


Remember that interviewers are selected. They're generally the happiest associates at the firm. This is by no means the only issue.


cb poster above. didn't say anyone thought life at cadwalader was a picnic, and in fact i did not like the vibe i got there. even if you go through all of the chambers and vault survey things, though, you'll find approximately the same assessment that i gave. fact is that cadwalader is probably a great fit for a very select group of people, and the mere fact that there are "happiest associates at the firm" speaks to that. it's OP's job to figure out where (s)he wants to go, so i was trying to give some earnest recon that (s)he could use to corroborate the opinions already formed at the cb that led to OP's offer. i know OP said that cool/laidback coworkers are important, but someone else may be using this thread for insight, so i added my two cents.

anyway, every interviewer and my lunch associates specifically said that the way things work (how deals are structured, etc.) depends on the partner you work for (sounded like associates and partners are pretty permanently attached there). this obviously has both massive downsides and possible upsides. but some people are down for that risk.

fwiw, i voted goodwin in the poll, not cadwalader. also, worth bearing in mind that quakeroats' post history suggests that every law firm imaginable is the worst possible choice.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby quakeroats » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
quakeroats wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Had a cb at cadwalader and even though some people were very unenthusiastic, third and fourth years were telling me how they have already been running deals (with, of course, minimal partner supervision). I got the idea that life there is entirely a function of the partner you're working for (in a very feudal way), but that the responsibility and opportunities to do cool things are there if you're willing to put in the work to get them.


Remember that interviewers are selected. They're generally the happiest associates at the firm. This is by no means the only issue.


cb poster above. didn't say anyone thought life at cadwalader was a picnic, and in fact i did not like the vibe i got there. even if you go through all of the chambers and vault survey things, though, you'll find approximately the same assessment that i gave. fact is that cadwalader is probably a great fit for a very select group of people, and the mere fact that there are "happiest associates at the firm" speaks to that. it's OP's job to figure out where (s)he wants to go, so i was trying to give some earnest recon that (s)he could use to corroborate the opinions already formed at the cb that led to OP's offer.

anyway, every interviewer and my lunch associates specifically said that the way things work (how deals are structured, etc.) depends on the partner you work for (sounded like associates and partners are pretty permanently attached there). this obviously has both massive downsides and possible upsides. but some people are down for that risk.


Cadwalader is an excellent fit for partners with large books, especially those that would like to make more money than their current firm is willing to offer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:W&S or GP.

Cahill is cutthroat, Cadwalader is awful (doesn't anyone remember the comment during OCI 2009 that the bottom of YLS had to settle for CWT, and that was emblematic of the troubled economy?), and Proskauer's NY office is losing significant amounts of corporate work to its other offices, which is never a good sign.



This. Winston or GP.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:W&S or GP.

Cahill is cutthroat, Cadwalader is awful (doesn't anyone remember the comment during OCI 2009 that the bottom of YLS had to settle for CWT, and that was emblematic of the troubled economy?), and Proskauer's NY office is losing significant amounts of corporate work to its other offices, which is never a good sign.



This. Winston or GP.


+1. perhaps worth noting that cahill or proskauer is maybe - maybe - worth a look if you want the "pure" NYC experience, since neither of the best choices here are HQ offices. but i'm a big GP fan, and don't know much about w&s but have not heard anything terrible about it, so it must be alright.

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

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Renzo » Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:42 am

Assuming you are at least semi-serious about litigating, I voted for Cahill.

Proskauer's star litigators (Lou Solomon et al.) all left for Cadwalader not that long ago. Goodwin NY does some IP lit, but that's about the extent of it, and I don't know much of anything about Winston's litigation team.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:47 am

What do people think about Cahill's name recognition outside NYC, particularly on the west coast?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:15 am

Cahill is not cut throat at all. I am speaking from experience. I worked there this summer and its so laid back for a NY firm its ridiculous. The bonuses for associates are all lockstep, so there's no competition to get a better check. Everyone in a particular class year gets the same amount. And since there's no minimum for billables, its more collegial. For the summers, we were encouraged to get out of there at 530 daily and told not to work on weekends. We all got offers and were told early on that we would. They're very up front about things which was appreciated by all.

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Blindmelon » Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:20 am

Anonymous User wrote:Cahill is not cut throat at all. I am speaking from experience. I worked there this summer and its so laid back for a NY firm its ridiculous. The bonuses for associates are all lockstep, so there's no competition to get a better check. Everyone in a particular class year gets the same amount. And since there's no minimum for billables, its more collegial. For the summers, we were encouraged to get out of there at 530 daily and told not to work on weekends. We all got offers and were told early on that we would. They're very up front about things which was appreciated by all.


Summer experence is not the associate experience. Very few summer programs make you work weekends or past 5. This is irrelevant.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:12 pm

Blindmelon wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Cahill is not cut throat at all. I am speaking from experience. I worked there this summer and its so laid back for a NY firm its ridiculous. The bonuses for associates are all lockstep, so there's no competition to get a better check. Everyone in a particular class year gets the same amount. And since there's no minimum for billables, its more collegial. For the summers, we were encouraged to get out of there at 530 daily and told not to work on weekends. We all got offers and were told early on that we would. They're very up front about things which was appreciated by all.


Summer experence is not the associate experience. Very few summer programs make you work weekends or past 5. This is irrelevant.


This is very relevant considering a ton of firms worked their summers to death. of course you work longer hours as a first year associate than you ever would as a summer, but conventional wisdom at cahill is that your schedule is much more forgiving than it is at other top firms. you haven't gone through the process yet....so please don't comment. after you've spent a summer at a large NY firm and can speak based on more than sheer speculation, then it will be different

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Blindmelon » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Cahill is not cut throat at all. I am speaking from experience. I worked there this summer and its so laid back for a NY firm its ridiculous. The bonuses for associates are all lockstep, so there's no competition to get a better check. Everyone in a particular class year gets the same amount. And since there's no minimum for billables, its more collegial. For the summers, we were encouraged to get out of there at 530 daily and told not to work on weekends. We all got offers and were told early on that we would. They're very up front about things which was appreciated by all.


Summer experence is not the associate experience. Very few summer programs make you work weekends or past 5. This is irrelevant.


This is very relevant considering a ton of firms worked their summers to death. of course you work longer hours as a first year associate than you ever would as a summer, but conventional wisdom at cahill is that your schedule is much more forgiving than it is at other top firms. you haven't gone through the process yet....so please don't comment. after you've spent a summer at a large NY firm and can speak based on more than sheer speculation, then it will be different


Er okay. I spent my summer at a V25, and I never really worked past 6. The associates came to our offices and made us leave usually around 5.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273406
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: goodwin v. cadwalader v. winston v. cahill v. proskauer

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Cahill is not cut throat at all. I am speaking from experience. I worked there this summer and its so laid back for a NY firm its ridiculous. The bonuses for associates are all lockstep, so there's no competition to get a better check. Everyone in a particular class year gets the same amount. And since there's no minimum for billables, its more collegial. For the summers, we were encouraged to get out of there at 530 daily and told not to work on weekends. We all got offers and were told early on that we would. They're very up front about things which was appreciated by all.


Summer experence is not the associate experience. Very few summer programs make you work weekends or past 5. This is irrelevant.


This is very relevant considering a ton of firms worked their summers to death. of course you work longer hours as a first year associate than you ever would as a summer, but conventional wisdom at cahill is that your schedule is much more forgiving than it is at other top firms. you haven't gone through the process yet....so please don't comment. after you've spent a summer at a large NY firm and can speak based on more than sheer speculation, then it will be different


Very close family member that is a Cahill associate. They work your ass off as a first year. They're nice to the summers because the later you stay, the later they have to stay checking your work. So if they made you stay until 10 or so, they'd be there even later. Not to mention that capital markets corporate work slowed down considerably over the summer from last fall/winter where the corporate associates were pulling all-nighters.

Cahill is a great firm, and I'd probably still pick it out of the OP's list (though that's mostly out of not knowing much about GP or Winston) -- but don't think it's even anything close to a "lifestyle" firm and the free market system is NOT easy to navigate at first.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.