What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

(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: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:06 pm

It's no secret that Vault prestige gears towards M&A. I'm curious how the vault rankings would look like for litigation. For example, Paul Weiss would probably be more highly ranked whereas Latham might be a bit lower, but would the rankings look about the same or vastly different?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:20 pm

Different. I imagine places like Quinn and Boies would be way higher. I also imagine a lot of the litigation boutiques that do not even make it on Vault would be pretty high. Check out which firms are on Band 1 litigation via chambers & partners. It seems to me that it is a very different game because a lot of the top litigation firms tend to be a lot smaller than the top M&A firms.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:29 pm

http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Usa/ ... per_273416

http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Usa/Editorial/41266

M&A v. litigation is pretty much the same for rankings, except Paul Weiss and Latham switch places and Davis Polk joins band 1 for litigation. Granted the litigation list is just New York, but then again, the Vault rankings seem to list only New York.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:29 pm

For those who don't want to peruse Chambers:

NY:
Band 1 - Cravath, DPW, Paul Weiss, STB, Skadden, S&C, Wachtell
Band 2 - Boies, Cleary, Debevoise, Kirkland, Quinn, Weil

DC:
Band 1 - Williams & Connolly
Band 2 - Baker Botts, Hogan, Kirkland, WilmerHale

Chicago:
Band 1 - Bartlit Beck, Kirkland, Sidley, Jenner
Band 2 - Winston, Mayer

LA/SF:
Band 1 - GDC, Keker, Munger, Quinn
Band 2 - Latham, MoFo, OMM, Orrick, Skadden

So yes, in NY the rankings are quite similar to Vault (in part because NY litigation practices tend to service corporate clients and litigate over M&A disputes). In other markets, they differ considerably. None of this should be news to anyone.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 15, 2012 9:23 pm

Does Chambers rank the boutiques in those rankings?

Omerta
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 6:47 pm

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Omerta » Thu Nov 15, 2012 9:39 pm


Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:46 pm

Omerta wrote:I like http://benchmarklitigation.com/ a lot.


That looks good.

So maybe the Vault rankings, based on that and Chambers, might be something like:

1) Cravath
2) Sullivan & Cromwell
3) Skadden
4) Wachtell
5) Paul Weiss
6) Simpson Thacher
7) Davis Polk
8) Williams & Connolly
9) Gibson Dunn
10) Kirkland

etc.?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Nov 17, 2012 8:27 pm

Not sure exactly how I'd rank them, but if I had to do a Vault list of litigation (a "L100") firms it would look something like:

L5: Kirkland, Paul Weiss, Gibson Dunn, Cravath, Williams & Connolly (not necessarily in this order)
L10: Wachtell, Quinn, S&C, DPW, Skadden (not necessarily in this order)
L20: STB, WilmerHale, Sidley, OMM, Boies, Bartlit Beck, Munger, Latham, Jones Day, Jenner (not necessarily in this order)

generally think benchmarklitigation is slightly too NY-centric, but what do i know

fish52
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby fish52 » Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:18 pm

Vault does have a litigation ranking, although it is for general commercial lit.

http://www.vault.com/wps/portal/usa/ran ... gYear=2013

bdubs
Posts: 3729
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby bdubs » Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:58 pm

General commercial is not the only area of litigation that you should be thinking about. Lots of litigation is area specific, chambers rankings for specialties are the best way to figure things out. Lots of the big NYC shops are really focused on securities litigation and don't seem to do as much general commercial stuff (or deemphasize it).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:21 pm

FWIW, the firms that wannabe litigators at my HYS school gunned for were Williams and Connolly, Boies, Munger, Susman, and Keker. Who knows if this maps onto anything of value in the real world, but these were the only litigation firms that very few people turend down (and usually it was only for other firms on this list).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, the firms that wannabe litigators at my HYS school gunned for were Williams and Connolly, Boies, Munger, Susman, and Keker. Who knows if this maps onto anything of value in the real world, but these were the only litigation firms that very few people turend down (and usually it was only for other firms on this list).


This is a pretty credited list, although I might omit Boies from it.

anon168
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby anon168 » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:It's no secret that Vault prestige gears towards M&A. I'm curious how the vault rankings would look like for litigation. For example, Paul Weiss would probably be more highly ranked whereas Latham might be a bit lower, but would the rankings look about the same or vastly different?


1. DOJ
2. Everyone else.

Any other list is basically a stupid way for people to anonymously pimp their own SA firms.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What would the top vault rankings look like for litigation?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, the firms that wannabe litigators at my HYS school gunned for were Williams and Connolly, Boies, Munger, Susman, and Keker. Who knows if this maps onto anything of value in the real world, but these were the only litigation firms that very few people turend down (and usually it was only for other firms on this list).


This is a pretty credited list, although I might omit Boies from it.


Same at my T10 school. And yes, Boies was perceived as very hard to get, but slightly less so than those other firms.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.