Have offers from both. Leaning transactional but am pretty unsure. I really like the people at both places, but am generally more drawn to Latham because of their broad practice area strength, unassigned program, and, admittedly, prestige (am I overstating the difference between the two in this regard?)
I know this largely is a city question, and I'm slightly leaning towards Chicago because it seems to be a higher QOL (due to lower COL). I've never lived in either city (I'm from a rural area; Midwest). Am I crazy to turn down Latham and/or living in NYC just because I think I might like living and working in Chicago better?
Long-term, I see myself in Chicago and not necessarily making partner/still in big-law.
(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
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.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
- Posts: 17386
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
Anonymous User wrote:Chicago is a much better city but Jenner corporate is nearly non-existent and you will likely be pushed to litigation. So you need to decide which is more important to you. Tough call.
(Anon is from and loves Chicago - there's really nothing in here that required anon, bro)
Chicago may be better for you, OP, but it certainly isn't a much better city. I lean towards Latham based on their transactional strength.
Who is online
The online users are hidden on this forum.