Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

(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: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 18, 2016 9:52 am

Interested generally in litigation, with maybe some current focus being on white collar and/or soft IP. I really responded to the culture/people at both firms. I want a place generally with nice people who seem to like each other, with the stress coming from the work and not the colleagues (I got the opposite impression when I went into Kirkland, for example). Thoughts on why one might outweigh the other?

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:16 am

Generally get the impression that debevoise is the kinder of the two in terms of culture and associate morale. Because deb is so white collar heavy, though, expect to do a lot of doc review as a junior.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 18, 2016 5:00 pm

Lathaming vs. No-lathaming....

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Lathaming vs. No-lathaming....


This seems to be a TLS inside joke that I'm not in on...since I'm currently weighing an offer from Latham could you elaborate? What is the knock on the firm culture that one should be aware of?

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:49 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Lathaming vs. No-lathaming....


This seems to be a TLS inside joke that I'm not in on...since I'm currently weighing an offer from Latham could you elaborate? What is the knock on the firm culture that one should be aware of?


Literally Google Lathaming

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:19 pm

"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.

Winter is Coming

Bronze
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 9:51 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Winter is Coming » Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.


Idk, Dell's behavior seems a little more egregious than what was going on at other firms during the recession. Also, a lot of other firms "disguising" layoffs was actually somewhat helpful career assistance/sabbaticals. Latham was absolutely savage in how they fired people.

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=124209&p=3243463&hilit=never+forget#p3243463

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:14 pm

Winter is Coming wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.


Idk, Dell's behavior seems a little more egregious than what was going on at other firms during the recession. Also, a lot of other firms "disguising" layoffs was actually somewhat helpful career assistance/sabbaticals. Latham was absolutely savage in how they fired people.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... t#p3243463



Thanks for posting this. Now I just have to drive myself insane weighing the risk for class of 2017 summer associates at Latham. Seems like TLS is rife with competing views on the topic...

itbdvorm

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby itbdvorm » Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Winter is Coming wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.


Idk, Dell's behavior seems a little more egregious than what was going on at other firms during the recession. Also, a lot of other firms "disguising" layoffs was actually somewhat helpful career assistance/sabbaticals. Latham was absolutely savage in how they fired people.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... t#p3243463



Thanks for posting this. Now I just have to drive myself insane weighing the risk for class of 2017 summer associates at Latham. Seems like TLS is rife with competing views on the topic...


Ridiculous. I know several people who got axed from Debevoise then too (and literally every firm not named Wachtell). I bet if you asked folks who left us around this time they would claim comparable treatment. EVERYONE was firing/laying people off - everyone just had different strategies and PR. This whole thing is silly.

The actual question in this thread is a toss-up. Debevoise has a great litigation group - but I'm told lots of internal investigations as a junior (had a friend who was shipped off to some random place in Germany to do doc review for a month as a junior). Don't know as much about Latham's group but I'm told they have hired a bunch of senior AUSA folks recently. I believe both offices are slightly more corporate-heavy. You'll do well - good luck.

Anonymous User
Posts: 316206
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:06 am

itbdvorm wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Winter is Coming wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.


Idk, Dell's behavior seems a little more egregious than what was going on at other firms during the recession. Also, a lot of other firms "disguising" layoffs was actually somewhat helpful career assistance/sabbaticals. Latham was absolutely savage in how they fired people.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... t#p3243463



Thanks for posting this. Now I just have to drive myself insane weighing the risk for class of 2017 summer associates at Latham. Seems like TLS is rife with competing views on the topic...


Ridiculous. I know several people who got axed from Debevoise then too (and literally every firm not named Wachtell). I bet if you asked folks who left us around this time they would claim comparable treatment. EVERYONE was firing/laying people off - everyone just had different strategies and PR. This whole thing is silly.

The actual question in this thread is a toss-up. Debevoise has a great litigation group - but I'm told lots of internal investigations as a junior (had a friend who was shipped off to some random place in Germany to do doc review for a month as a junior). Don't know as much about Latham's group but I'm told they have hired a bunch of senior AUSA folks recently. I believe both offices are slightly more corporate-heavy. You'll do well - good luck.


Also considering the same decision but with Weil and Cleary thrown in. Any thoughts on relative strength of litigation practices?

itbdvorm

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 9:09 am

Re: Latham NYC v. Debevoise NYC - Lit

Postby itbdvorm » Wed Aug 24, 2016 11:25 am

Anonymous User wrote:
itbdvorm wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Winter is Coming wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:"Lathaming" is cute, but so unfair, really. Pretty much every firm had big layoffs, they just were clever about disguising it. A few people here, a few people there. Latham was at least upfront, imo.


Idk, Dell's behavior seems a little more egregious than what was going on at other firms during the recession. Also, a lot of other firms "disguising" layoffs was actually somewhat helpful career assistance/sabbaticals. Latham was absolutely savage in how they fired people.

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... t#p3243463



Thanks for posting this. Now I just have to drive myself insane weighing the risk for class of 2017 summer associates at Latham. Seems like TLS is rife with competing views on the topic...


Ridiculous. I know several people who got axed from Debevoise then too (and literally every firm not named Wachtell). I bet if you asked folks who left us around this time they would claim comparable treatment. EVERYONE was firing/laying people off - everyone just had different strategies and PR. This whole thing is silly.

The actual question in this thread is a toss-up. Debevoise has a great litigation group - but I'm told lots of internal investigations as a junior (had a friend who was shipped off to some random place in Germany to do doc review for a month as a junior). Don't know as much about Latham's group but I'm told they have hired a bunch of senior AUSA folks recently. I believe both offices are slightly more corporate-heavy. You'll do well - good luck.


Also considering the same decision but with Weil and Cleary thrown in. Any thoughts on relative strength of litigation practices?


All great as far as I know. But I think all have different specialties. You should look for fit and practice and long-term goals.



Return to “Legal Employment�

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.