Top Law Schools

Magnificent wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:The "Why Cravath" question is interesting. No doubt you have great exit options, but are they significantly better than other elite firms who will also give you offers? This could be a combination of lies on the part of associates at other firms and honesty on the part of those at Cravath, but it does seem Cravath associates bill at near WLRK levels with out the commensurate increase in bonus/salary. Also, since Cravath sets the market bonus-wise, it's rare that Cravath will offer any better compensation than its peers or slight inferiors (and often gets topped by them).

As far as the off-topic DC/NY discussion goes, saying one city is better than the other for lawyers is monumentally stupid. Neither are dominant in their respective markets. DC is all about politicians and those who move in their circles, even at top lit shops, most associates aren't doing that kind of work, while NYC is ruled by the bankers. If you don't want to do lit (and many don't) DC is not going to be as exciting/interesting as NYC. Lit is probably better depending on practice area, but its all a wash anyways.

People on here don't seem to get that law is a service industry. No one ever talks about a city as the "legal capital of the US" the way that Banking is in NYC/government is in DC/entertainment is in LA/etc. We are always going to be working FOR someone else who is more powerful/influential in whatever city we are in. We aren't the ones making things happen, we just make sure they happen smoothly and deal with the fallout if they don't. Yes, none of these things could happen without us, but we aren't the driving force behind them either. This is true whether you are in DC/NYC.

You obviously don't know how DC works. Lawyers in DC don't work for politicians. They work for large corporations and use their political connections to fix issues that their client might have with government agencies and Congress.

Even if I took your assumption to be true that DC lawyers work for politicians, there are still major difference between bankers and politicians. For one, most politicians used to be lawyers and obviously have respect of the profession and those in it. Its more of a collaborative relationship whereas the bankers have disdain for lawyers and obviously most aren't lawyers and thus don't have respect for the profession. Also you can never discount money. Most lawyers in DC make more than the politicians so the respect factor is mutual whereas bankers will always make more than lawyers in NYC.

Anonymous User wrote:

Magnificent wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:The "Why Cravath" question is interesting. No doubt you have great exit options, but are they significantly better than other elite firms who will also give you offers? This could be a combination of lies on the part of associates at other firms and honesty on the part of those at Cravath, but it does seem Cravath associates bill at near WLRK levels with out the commensurate increase in bonus/salary. Also, since Cravath sets the market bonus-wise, it's rare that Cravath will offer any better compensation than its peers or slight inferiors (and often gets topped by them).

As far as the off-topic DC/NY discussion goes, saying one city is better than the other for lawyers is monumentally stupid. Neither are dominant in their respective markets. DC is all about politicians and those who move in their circles, even at top lit shops, most associates aren't doing that kind of work, while NYC is ruled by the bankers. If you don't want to do lit (and many don't) DC is not going to be as exciting/interesting as NYC. Lit is probably better depending on practice area, but its all a wash anyways.

People on here don't seem to get that law is a service industry. No one ever talks about a city as the "legal capital of the US" the way that Banking is in NYC/government is in DC/entertainment is in LA/etc. We are always going to be working FOR someone else who is more powerful/influential in whatever city we are in. We aren't the ones making things happen, we just make sure they happen smoothly and deal with the fallout if they don't. Yes, none of these things could happen without us, but we aren't the driving force behind them either. This is true whether you are in DC/NYC.

You obviously don't know how DC works. Lawyers in DC don't work for politicians. They work for large corporations and use their political connections to fix issues that their client might have with government agencies and Congress.

Even if I took your assumption to be true that DC lawyers work for politicians, there are still major difference between bankers and politicians. For one, most politicians used to be lawyers and obviously have respect of the profession and those in it. Its more of a collaborative relationship whereas the bankers have disdain for lawyers and obviously most aren't lawyers and thus don't have respect for the profession. Also you can never discount money. Most lawyers in DC make more than the politicians so the respect factor is mutual whereas bankers will always make more than lawyers in NYC.

I feel like you are describing what maybe 10% of the lawyers in DC do. Even then it's mostly people who are partners or are likely to become partners. As a big law associate you are still a faceless drone doing whatever needs to be done so the real influential people at your firm can do what you are describing. Big law associates are rarely going to be "respected" anywhere...

If you want to be the big respected person in any city, choose another career accept that this will never happen to you

keg411 wrote:The city itself is way too political for me to ever live there.

keg411 wrote:I just hate politics in general, which is why I hate DC (if I said that the lawyers are beholden to politicians, I meant more in the sense that pretty much *everything* in DC revolves around politics/politicians, not that they necessarily work directly for them). The city itself is way too political for me to ever live there. But a fuckton more lawyers want to be politicians then want to be bankers or businesspeople.

On topic: I wouldn't want to work at Cravath either (didn't bid on it, didn't visit the hospitality suite, didn't mass mail). Too formal/old school/white shoe.

alabamabound wrote:Having worked at Cravath before law school as a lowly paralegal, I feel like there are some convincing answers to OP's question. They probably haven't been voiced yet amidst the shitstorm.

Cravath attorneys do a lot of complex, non-cookie-cutter work on both the lit and corporate sides that can be very satisfying to people who choose big law not as a stepping stone but as an end in itself. That's true of its peers as well. Outside of that, there are perks that go along w/ being connected to the prestige associated with the firm name. Prestige-haters are common on TLS, but this is a valid reason to choose Cravath. Prestige opens a lot of doors that are pleasant to walk through. Cravath's prestige isn't markedly different from its peers inside the big law community (or among those hoping to join it). But it does seem to carry more weight outside of that fishbowl. Having it on the resume is also a nice conversation starter.

The ATL-driven obsession w/ who pays what bonus each bonus season has perhaps tarnished the firm somewhat in the minds of law students and (some) junior associates over the last few years. I feel like that's a very myopic reaction, but I might be wrong.

keg411 wrote:
On topic: I wouldn't want to work at Cravath either (didn't bid on it, didn't visit the hospitality suite, didn't mass mail). Too formal/old school/white shoe.

LawIdiot86 wrote:

keg411 wrote:
On topic: I wouldn't want to work at Cravath either (didn't bid on it, didn't visit the hospitality suite, didn't mass mail). Too formal/old school/white shoe.

Interesting. And old school, formal atmosphere is exactly what I look for in a firm. I was actually thrilled when I found out the practice group at my firm was the only one where the partners request the associates where suits everyday and all the partners wear ties.

Anonymous User wrote:

alabamabound wrote:Having worked at Cravath before law school as a lowly paralegal, I feel like there are some convincing answers to OP's question. They probably haven't been voiced yet amidst the shitstorm.

Cravath attorneys do a lot of complex, non-cookie-cutter work on both the lit and corporate sides that can be very satisfying to people who choose big law not as a stepping stone but as an end in itself. That's true of its peers as well. Outside of that, there are perks that go along w/ being connected to the prestige associated with the firm name. Prestige-haters are common on TLS, but this is a valid reason to choose Cravath. Prestige opens a lot of doors that are pleasant to walk through. Cravath's prestige isn't markedly different from its peers inside the big law community (or among those hoping to join it). But it does seem to carry more weight outside of that fishbowl. Having it on the resume is also a nice conversation starter.

The ATL-driven obsession w/ who pays what bonus each bonus season has perhaps tarnished the firm somewhat in the minds of law students and (some) junior associates over the last few years. I feel like that's a very myopic reaction, but I might be wrong.

what were the attorney hours like? any horror stories (e.g., screamer partners etc.)??

Anonymous User wrote:

alabamabound wrote:Having worked at Cravath before law school as a lowly paralegal, I feel like there are some convincing answers to OP's question. They probably haven't been voiced yet amidst the shitstorm.

Cravath attorneys do a lot of complex, non-cookie-cutter work on both the lit and corporate sides that can be very satisfying to people who choose big law not as a stepping stone but as an end in itself. That's true of its peers as well. Outside of that, there are perks that go along w/ being connected to the prestige associated with the firm name. Prestige-haters are common on TLS, but this is a valid reason to choose Cravath. Prestige opens a lot of doors that are pleasant to walk through. Cravath's prestige isn't markedly different from its peers inside the big law community (or among those hoping to join it). But it does seem to carry more weight outside of that fishbowl. Having it on the resume is also a nice conversation starter.

The ATL-driven obsession w/ who pays what bonus each bonus season has perhaps tarnished the firm somewhat in the minds of law students and (some) junior associates over the last few years. I feel like that's a very myopic reaction, but I might be wrong.

what were the attorney hours like? any horror stories (e.g., screamer partners etc.)??

Arbiter213 wrote:

keg411 wrote:I just hate politics in general, which is why I hate DC (if I said that the lawyers are beholden to politicians, I meant more in the sense that pretty much *everything* in DC revolves around politics/politicians, not that they necessarily work directly for them). The city itself is way too political for me to ever live there. But a fuckton more lawyers want to be politicians then want to be bankers or businesspeople.

On topic: I wouldn't want to work at Cravath either (didn't bid on it, didn't visit the hospitality suite, didn't mass mail). Too formal/old school/white shoe.

Politics is to DC what the Movie Business is to LA.