Cravath or Covington DC for Litigation? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am currently at HYS. My basic medium-term goal is to become an AUSA. I lived in DC over the summer and while it was okay, I was sort of underwhelmed. NYC seems more my speed, but having never lived there, I have the standard reservations that come with NYC.

My current thoughts on pros and cons of each:

Cravath Pros:
+ Loved everyone I met (associates and partners alike); people seemed interesting, smart, engaging, fun
+ Drank the rotation system kool-aid—they convinced me that I’ll get more substantive experience early on in my career; I am pretty sold on the idea of doing one general lit rotation, followed by a rotation with one of their white collar partners, and then applying for USAOs after 3 years
+ Exit options are great
+ Excited about living in NYC
+ Arguably more helpful with SDNY and EDNY judges and USAOs, which both appeal to me geographically and substantively (interested in white collar)
+ Arguably better name recognition for firms and USAOs in my home state (may matter if I decide to lateral)

Cravath Cons:
+ Standard anxiety about living in New York—expensive; tiny apartment, etc.
+ Worse hours
+ Rotation system—maybe it will suck and I will get a shitty partner
+ Shared offices
+ White collar practice is fairly new, not as well-established (basically four partners practice it)

Covington Pros:
+ DC is a cheaper, “easier” (?) place to live
+ Better exit options to big fed
+ Amazing, new building; no shared offices
+ More flexibility over what I get to work on (though not total, since Covington is not free market)
+ More interesting substantively, perhaps—regulatory litigation, appellate, and other government-related litigation would all be options
+ More established white collar practice
+ Better hours

Covington Cons:
+ People were boring; I really did not click with anyone I met
+ As mentioned, DC was sort of underwhelming; I am not sure that’s where I wanna be
+ Potentially lower compensation (below-market bonuses unless you bill NYC hours, which negates one of Covington’s advantages)
+ Not as helpful for SDNY and EDNY; but probably better for DDC and EDVa
+ Potentially less mentorship, less substance earlier on in my career as compared to the rotation system
+ People seemed less social outside of work; i.e. they come to work, then go home to their families and significant others less after-work

Any thoughts would be great. And if I'm missing pros or cons, or have misstated anything, feel free to correct me.

[wwwcol]

What kind of additional thoughts are you looking for? It sounds like you've already settled on Cravath and are just looking for validation. Just accept the Cravath offer and be done with it bro

[Anonymous User]

What kind of additional thoughts are you looking for? It sounds like you've already settled on Cravath and are just looking for validation. Just accept the Cravath offer and be done with it bro

Just wondering if I'm failing to consider anything with these firms, and whether my impressions and thoughts are at odds with what others might know about these two.

ETA: Also, hopefully this post will be helpful for people searching in the future.

[Anonymous User]

.

[smaug]

I think Cov DC is a better outcome than Cravath in that it might nudge open a couple of doors that remain closed for NYC biglaw types, while still keeping the NYC stuff open.

CSM is obviously very well regarded/there's not a "wrong" choice here. I just think you might be able to dabble in more areas of work at Cov.

I doubt that one or the other is better for placing into AUSA gigs, but my impression (correct me if I'm wrong) is that Cov.'s white collar practice is much stronger.

[Anonymous User]

"Litigation" at these two firms means two completely different things from a birds-eye view. Do you have an idea of which you would rather do?

[Anonymous User]

OP here.

I'm honestly pretty open as far as that's concerned. I do want a solid white collar experience at some point, but I am less concerned about that than I used to be. Several partners made the valid point that for USAOs, it's much more important that you get litigation skills, and that's something you rarely get in a white collar practice, where the goal is to avoid charges or enforcement.

Having said that, I do think Covington has an edge as far as substance is concerned. Oh balance I am probably more interested in the legal issues Covington tends to deal with (regulatory, other government related litigations etc). But I don't have enough experience to say one way or the other. My background is finance and business, so I could easily see the more commercial-focused litigation at Cravath being appealing too.

[dixiecupdrinking]

You sound like a much better fit for Cravath.

[Anonymous User]

half the people voting for X or Y are probably just hoping to hear from the other firm ...

[Anonymous User]

Do you have offers from the NY firms with stronger white collar groups that place more prominently into AUSA, e.g. PW/Davis Polk/Simpson? Those might be a better fit for your interests.

At CSM you'll be doing securities and commercial lit, and you'll only experience white collar if you rotate with one of the partners that maintains that case load (Ben Gruenstein, ect.). I would be very wary of that prospect. Unless you're comfortable with a very generalist training and less immediate support to AUSA, don't choose Cravath for litigation. Having experience with CSM and new york peers, I would go to Covington DC here, and if you decide you really want to live in NY at the end of your summer, it won't be difficult to get there either pre or post-clerkship.

Then again, fit is important, and if you really click at one firm at not at another, that could be more important than these more practice-specific considerations, since you'll be a competitive lateral/3L/post-clerkship hire outside New York down the line. Just keep in mind that from a junior litigator perspective, being in another market often affords more opportunities for professional development, early trial exposure, practice diversity, ect. than an NY V10.

[Anonymous User]

half the people voting for X or Y are probably just hoping to hear from the other firm ...

Many if not most of the posters contributing here are practicing attorneys, so this is a strange comment.

[First Offense]

Exit options for both are probably about as good as it gets. They have different strengths and specializations, but unless you have substantive experience you probably don't have a very good idea of what you think you're interested in entails anyway. I would do second looks/call associates to get a better picture if it's actually a close decision.

[Anonymous User]

If I knew nothing about your interests, aspirations, geographical preferences, and impressions of these firms, I would tell you to go to Covington. Given what you've posted, I would pick CSM in a heartbeat. Do you have a sense of what kind of white collar work you want to do? (FCPA? SEC investigations? Criminal antitrust?). If you want to do white-collar work in SDNY/EDNY (i.e., financial crimes), I think the kind of work you'd get at CSM would be a good fit. I also think that developing really excellent litigation skills will help you more than doing junior-level white collar work; doing endless discovery and writing fact memos doesn't really teach you to do much but do endless discovery and write fact memos.

[smaug]

The implied assertion in the last post is amazing.

[Nekrowizard]

If you want to do white collar and end up in EDNY or SDNY, wouldn't S&C or DPW be much better choices?

[Anonymous User]

If you want to do white collar and end up in EDNY or SDNY, wouldn't S&C or DPW be much better choices?

Maybe, but here are a few things weighing against that for me:

1. I really liked the people at Cravath a lot more.
2. I'm attracted to the rotation system.
3. From what I've been told, white collar work as junior is really not all that great training for a future AUSA. You don't actually learn how to litigate in those practice groups. So while those firms have more established white collar groups, I'm not sure how useful that will be. I would likely do a general litigation rotation at Cravath, and then preference a rotation with one of the white collar partners.

Now, what DPW and some others do have going for them is the deeper bench of former AUSAs at those firms. I'm not sure (truly) how valuable that is, or whether it outweighs some of my other considerations.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for all of the comments so far. They have definitely motivated me to give Covington a fresh look, and I plan to go back for another visit.

[Desert Fox]

[A. Nony Mouse]

I do think connections to a USAO are a huge help in getting a job there. (I have no idea whether the connections from one firm over another are worth basing this kind of decision on, though.)

[Desert Fox]

[smaug]

The implied assertion in the last post is amazing.

Assertion that white collar work is endless doc review = I RATE THIS TRUE

Assertion that CSM juniors do real work = I RATE THIS PANTS ON FIRE

Yeah I was thinking the assertion that CSM juniors so far more real work than Cov juniors.

[jbagelboy]

The implied assertion in the last post is amazing.

Assertion that white collar work is endless doc review = I RATE THIS TRUE

Assertion that CSM juniors do real work = I RATE THIS PANTS ON FIRE

Yeah I was thinking the assertion that CSM juniors so far more real work than Cov juniors.

Or any other V10 peer compared ITT

[Anonymous User]

So most folks would say Covington juniors will likely get more substance early? That'd certainly be a pro for Cov

[smaug]

So most folks would say Covington juniors will likely get more substance early? That'd certainly be a pro for Cob

I'm saying that individual differences will be greater than firm differences at that level.

[dixiecupdrinking]

So most folks would say Covington juniors will likely get more substance early? That'd certainly be a pro for Cob

No.

People are saying that white collar work doesn't give you good litigation skills because it's fact-heavy and you're not filing things in court. There's some truth to that but I think working in white collar practice is still viewed as a more natural path to AUSA, for whatever reason. Ideally you wouldn't do all internal investigations and you wouldn't do all civil lit.