Top Law Schools

Don't really want to get too far into my current position but I'm very interested to know what people what do between these firms. I want corporate and most interested in M&A. Primarily interested in quality of work and exit options and, to a lesser extent, partnership prospects.

all thoughts appreciated.

I'm a little biased (starting at one of these firms this fall), but l'd narrow it down to Wilmer, Goodwin, and Skadden. Chambers lists the first two of those in band 1 and Skadden in band 2, and the rest in band 3 (EDIT: Bingham is in Band 2, which is kinda surprising to me, I didn't think they were on Skadden's level in Boston M&A, I guess I don't know as much about them as the rest). Chambers isn't the end of the discussion, but I think here it represents the quality and quantity of M&A work at these firms. (That said, these are all great Boston options, and the difference is such that if you have a great feel/fit at one of them, no one will fault you for choosing Foley or Choate or Bingham or Mintz.)

Then, I'd decide if you want to work at the main office, in which case you'd have Wilmer and Goodwin, or are going with the satellite experience, in which case Skadden would be the choice. Between Wilmer and Goodwin, you're probably going to go on fit. If there are subtle differences, Goodwin probably has a bit of an advantage with mid/small market PE and tech/life science company work (see the recent Amgen-Onyx deal) that comes from their strength in emerging company stuff, while Wilmer will probably lean a bit more towards general public company stuff. Still, pretty similar practices (as opposed to the big PE emphasis if Ropes was in the discussion) means those two are probably a question of fit.

Whichever way you go, congrats on the great choices.

bump for more votes. any rationale is appreciated. thanks to poster above.

Anonymous User wrote:If there are subtle differences, Goodwin probably has a bit of an advantage with mid/small market PE and tech/life science company work (see the recent Amgen-Onyx deal) that comes from their strength in emerging company stuff, while Wilmer will probably lean a bit more towards general public company stuff. Still, pretty similar practices (as opposed to the big PE emphasis if Ropes was in the discussion) means those two are probably a question of fit.

The above is absolutely spot-on and what I'd base my decision on. If emerging company (mostly tech/life sciences) work is particularly appealing to you, Goodwin is your choice. If you're more into mid-market PE/VC or public M&A, Wilmer or Skadden would be the better choice. I also agree with the above poster that if you're committed to corporate, those three firms stand out.