Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 428551
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
If you were interested in litigation and getting substantive experience--and maybe even working your way up in the firm--where would you go? It would be great if you could elaborate.
-
- Posts: 428551
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
OP here. What do I have to do to get you voters to elaborate? I cant even get a Quinn remains comment from Grizz..
I imagine that Quinn is in the lead because it bills itself as giving real experience to juniors. But I know that Quinn also has relatively high leverage, so how do you think that plays in? Again, really looking for any advice because I could see myself trying to stay at the firm for the long haul.
I imagine that Quinn is in the lead because it bills itself as giving real experience to juniors. But I know that Quinn also has relatively high leverage, so how do you think that plays in? Again, really looking for any advice because I could see myself trying to stay at the firm for the long haul.
- RELIC
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:00 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
This whole thread is humble brag.
- Elston Gunn
- Posts: 3820
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Seriously. Or something.RELIC wrote:This whole thread is humble brag.
OP you've got to be more specific. Can you really not narrow it down from 6 firms (which, BTW, you're not supposed to have 6 offers open at a time because most people can choose by that point) based on personality fit, etc?
If it were me, Paul Weiss or Cleary. They have the strongest Lit practices, and trying to make partner is a fool's errand at any of these firms.
I wouldn't go to Quinn because I would be miserable there. But we need to know how you feel about it.
-
- Posts: 9807
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Quinn remains
But srsly no one can help w out more info
But srsly no one can help w out more info
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 2399
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Enjoying OPs combo vague booking/humble bragging.
-
- Posts: 3727
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:23 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Quinn if you're really serious about getting some experience early on and can deal with the weirdness of the place.
Otherwise I would choose between Cleary and Paul Weiss. IMO Cleary is generally a better place to work because it's lock step, but PW has a slightly better rep for litigation.
Otherwise I would choose between Cleary and Paul Weiss. IMO Cleary is generally a better place to work because it's lock step, but PW has a slightly better rep for litigation.
- OneMoreLawHopeful
- Posts: 1191
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
I think the problem is that it's hard to believe you have offers from all these firms and absolutely NO IDEA about which is a good fit for you.Anonymous User wrote:OP here. What do I have to do to get you voters to elaborate? I cant even get a Quinn remains comment from Grizz..
I imagine that Quinn is in the lead because it bills itself as giving real experience to juniors. But I know that Quinn also has relatively high leverage, so how do you think that plays in? Again, really looking for any advice because I could see myself trying to stay at the firm for the long haul.
I did callbacks with 4 of those firms last year (admittedly at California offices), and I know they have wildly different cultures (Quinn and Latham in particular tend to have such extreme cultures that people either love them or hate them). It's really difficult to believe anyone could do callbacks with all six, get offers, get the emails/letters that come post offer, and still cannot knock one or two off the list.
Moreover, there is no one out there who says "I want to work for a firm that doesn't trust me with any responsibility for years, and is a bad long-term bet!" as a result, your question comes off as "Which firm will help me have a good career?"
I know this might sound harsh, but that's not my intention, I just want the OP to know why there aren't any helpful posts.
-
- Posts: 428551
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
PW isn't lockstep? Not lockstep for partners or for associate bonuses? Both? For some reason I thought they were lockstep.bdubs wrote:IMO Cleary is generally a better place to work because it's lock step, but PW has a slightly better rep for litigation.
-
- Posts: 3727
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:23 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Lockstep for partners. PW follows market for associates only.Anonymous User wrote:PW isn't lockstep? Not lockstep for partners or for associate bonuses? Both? For some reason I thought they were lockstep.bdubs wrote:IMO Cleary is generally a better place to work because it's lock step, but PW has a slightly better rep for litigation.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:12 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
It's hard to say where you would have higher chances of making partner straight through. I would say definitely not PW, and it seems as though Quinn doesn't promote a lot of its associates. I don't know too much about the others but because Wilmer & GD are "satellite" offices, I would say maybe you have more of an opportunity to make a difference there as they try to bolster their practice in NY.
But I still vote Quinn for exit options.
But I still vote Quinn for exit options.
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: Paul Weiss v Quinn v Gibson Dunn v Latham v Wilmer v Cleary
Quinn exit options are pretty much the same as any of the other firms on this list. Also, the hours are absolutely horrendous. The only upside is maybe you'd get more substantive experience early on which might let you gtfo earlier than you'd be able to at other firms.suoicerp wrote:It's hard to say where you would have higher chances of making partner straight through. I would say definitely not PW, and it seems as though Quinn doesn't promote a lot of its associates. I don't know too much about the others but because Wilmer & GD are "satellite" offices, I would say maybe you have more of an opportunity to make a difference there as they try to bolster their practice in NY.
But I still vote Quinn for exit options.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login