Law Firms to Stay Away From Forum

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader
Dechert
DLA Piper
Baker McKenzie
Paul Hastings

Right, basically firms that have had major partner defections. This list plus Pepper Hamilton and Stroock.

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader is a frequent mention in this thread but it bears repeating. Heard second-hand that the DC office this past summer hired five summers interested in litigation, then on the first week told them that they would only be hiring two of them into litigation at the end of the summer. The other three would be placed in capital markets.

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader
Dechert
DLA Piper
Baker McKenzie
Paul Hastings

Right, basically firms that have had major partner defections. This list plus Pepper Hamilton and Stroock.

I'd add Kasowitz to the list as well.

[Anonymous User]

Dykema

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader
Dechert
DLA Piper
Baker McKenzie
Paul Hastings

Right, basically firms that have had major partner defections. This list plus Pepper Hamilton and Stroock.

I'd add Kasowitz to the list as well.

Why Kasowitz?

[Anonymous User]

Cadwalader is a frequent mention in this thread but it bears repeating. Heard second-hand that the DC office this past summer hired five summers interested in litigation, then on the first week told them that they would only be hiring two of them into litigation at the end of the summer. The other three would be placed in capital markets.

Obviously you shouldn't go to Cadwalader if you're interested in litigation. They do not have a strong litigation practice...it's a transactional firm. I'd also avoid the DC office generally. The partner defections a couple years ago were from that office.

[NYCounsel]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

[Anonymous User]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

How bad was NRF in NY after going 100% in 2017?

[Wild Card]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

what does it mean to be "functionally illiterate?" where do you find these people and why do you hire them in the first place?

[lavarman84]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

Sounds like Norton Rose should change the way they recruit. There's no reason why a biglaw firm should be ending up with functionally illiterate people. I could understand a firm ending up with people who lacked a work ethic or had bad attitudes because it's not always possible to screen for that, but I can't really understand how a firm ends up with people who are incompetent to the point of being functionally illiterate. It sounds like the firm is looking for SAs in the wrong places.

[Anonymous User]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

what does it mean to be "functionally illiterate?" where do you find these people and why do you hire them in the first place?

It means “spin bought by a dumbass associate who will be blindsided by The Talk”

[Anonymous User]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

what does it mean to be "functionally illiterate?" where do you find these people and why do you hire them in the first place?

It means “spin bought by a dumbass associate who will be blindsided by The Talk”

Name one other industry where 100% of an intern class get $190K starting jobs or else their employers get excoriated on the internet? Delusional K-JDs man... Last I checked tons of firms have <100% offer rates. Nobody is forcing you to go to those firms. I heard Cravath offers 100%, good luck at 3L OCI.

[NYCounsel]

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

what does it mean to be "functionally illiterate?" where do you find these people and why do you hire them in the first place?

It means “spin bought by a dumbass associate who will be blindsided by The Talk”

Name one other industry where 100% of an intern class get $190K starting jobs or else their employers get excoriated on the internet? Delusional K-JDs man... Last I checked tons of firms have <100% offer rates. Nobody is forcing you to go to those firms. I heard Cravath offers 100%, good luck at 3L OCI.

Yes, landing a biglaw position during law school almost always guarantees an offer of employment and an exceptional starting salary. And that's great and worth acknowledging.

However, that is not relevant to what it means to be "functionally illiterate" and it is not relevant to the larger point that such a descriptor, functionally illiterate, is often spin. It's an easy excuse for firms to decline to hire people whose performance was up to speed and who did nothing wrong, when in reality they're being let go because of conditions outside of their control (firm's financial health or lack thereof, firm vision or priorities, etc.). Also, let's be real and speak less exaggerantly. While people might sometimes be largely lucky to have landed biglaw, the path to getting there is so perilous and filled with hurdles that next to no one who makes it, if anyone at all, is actually functionally illiterate. That's not to say people don't make dumb social or professional mistakes after getting in, but this thread isn't about such cases.

[Anonymous User]

Norton Rose Fullbright. They are super shaky financially, and have no offered a good chunk of their class in recent years. If I was going into OCI, I'd only go here if I had no other option.

NY office had 20 Summers after the merger and offered 100% this year...Yes I'm defending my firm but its not "super shaky financially."

I haven't felt compelled to log into my account in a long time, but this is a flat out, dangerous LIE. I know a few summers who were no offered from this office, and it's awful because it had nothing to do with their performance. I'm assuming you're a recruiter, a clueless asssociate, or PR for the firm, because it doesn't make sense why you'd mislead people on this.

Edit: Actually, realized this post was made last Augusst, not this one. Whoops! But FWIW, Norton Rose was atrocious this year.

It’s certainly true that we almost always no-offer people, but keep in mind that for many of the V50-100 firms that aren’t as profitable, it’s just harder to recruit talent. Our reputation sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as we end up attracting lower caliber students of which at least a couple a year we just simply cannot hire, either because they turn out to be functionally illiterate or worse. In what other industry does one walk into a summer internship expecting to get a job with 100% certainty? In that case what’s even the point of doing a summer internship in the first place?

Fact is that the 100% offer thing may work for the top of the top firms, but really has no place for the rest of the firms. Many firms that force themselves to it just end up with incompetent people they struggle to fire later.

what does it mean to be "functionally illiterate?" where do you find these people and why do you hire them in the first place?

It means “spin bought by a dumbass associate who will be blindsided by The Talk”

Name one other industry where 100% of an intern class get $190K starting jobs or else their employers get excoriated on the internet? Delusional K-JDs man... Last I checked tons of firms have <100% offer rates. Nobody is forcing you to go to those firms. I heard Cravath offers 100%, good luck at 3L OCI.

Other industries aren’t relevant. We were discussing the legal industry. The expectation is that firms hire their Summers. If they don’t thats bad signaling. If you bought hook, line and sinker any “functionally illiterate summers we just had to no offer” line of BS then you’re probably an idiot.

[Anonymous User]

A little more context here may be helpful. Not sure where the 100% offer rate expectation comes from, but it's one of those TLS dogmas that may not stand up to scrutiny.

The 100% expectation may be more of thing in NYC (but a quick glance at Vault/NALP will show no-offers there are not that rare), but it certainly isn't valid in TX (not that we are exclusively talking about TX, but NRF is/was a TX firm before its merger(s)). If you look at Vault, you'll see that V&E (72/75) and Baker Botts (70/76) (two other TX firms) both no-offered several people in 2016 during the oil bust. Texas used to allow split summers until very recently, so TX firms quite routinely no-offered people (offer rates often sat in the 80%s for NRF and BB, and higher for V&E). Back in the early 2010s when I was in UT Law, I knew several people who got no-offered at BB solely because their 2L grades dipped .0X below their threshold. But this was considered acceptable since TX firms let you split, so firms were less likely to screw people over by no-offering them.

However, now that so many East Coast firms have moved into TX, the TX firms stopped allowing splits, and the pressure was on to give everyone an offer. As a result, the 2017 NALP forms show that BB and NRF offered every 2L summer in their Houston offices, while V&E Houston offered 32/34.

In summary, (1) in TX, things are done a little differently due to the old splitting system, but even though splitting is no longer a thing, firms still no-offer people out of culture and habit (a habit that HR is trying to eradicate). (2) If you went on NALP, you'll find that no-offers everywhere are far more common than law students may think. Students have every right to complain about said firms on TLS, obviously, and have every right to select firms based on offer rate, but it is good also to know what reality is and to act accordingly going into an SA at certain firms.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

I mean I would possibly argue the same, not because of any nonsense about their standards, but because I've heard some pretty awful things about working there. I'm under the impression that the attorneys there are really friendly people, but I've heard that they're burning through associates at an even higher rate than the usual for BigLaw, and during OCI a lot of people mentioned hearing similarly negative things about the firm.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

I mean I would possibly argue the same, not because of any nonsense about their standards, but because I've heard some pretty awful things about working there. I'm under the impression that the attorneys there are really friendly people, but I've heard that they're burning through associates at an even higher rate than the usual for BigLaw, and during OCI a lot of people mentioned hearing similarly negative things about the firm.

At my callback, everyone was very friendly, but most associates were not convincing about it being a good place to work. I usually ask why a person is staying at a firm during interviews to see if they can convincingly say good things about the firm. At STB all of the associates specifically said they were looking forward to leaving the firm.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

I mean I would possibly argue the same, not because of any nonsense about their standards, but because I've heard some pretty awful things about working there. I'm under the impression that the attorneys there are really friendly people, but I've heard that they're burning through associates at an even higher rate than the usual for BigLaw, and during OCI a lot of people mentioned hearing similarly negative things about the firm.

At my callback, everyone was very friendly, but most associates were not convincing about it being a good place to work. I usually ask why a person is staying at a firm during interviews to see if they can convincingly say good things about the firm. At STB all of the associates specifically said they were looking forward to leaving the firm.

That seems to be in line with what I've been hearing. I've been told of at least one person who jumped ship to PI/government even though they were entirely corporate, just so they could get away from STB. The associates manning their hospitality suite at my OCI also mentioned how there was a department (I forget which specifically) that had to pull in associates from other departments because there were constant fire drills going on; it gave me the impression that they were understaffed and therefore overworking people.

[Anonymous User]

Nobody has yet answered the question of why DLA is on somebody’s list. Think it’s been mentioned twice.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

I mean I would possibly argue the same, not because of any nonsense about their standards, but because I've heard some pretty awful things about working there. I'm under the impression that the attorneys there are really friendly people, but I've heard that they're burning through associates at an even higher rate than the usual for BigLaw, and during OCI a lot of people mentioned hearing similarly negative things about the firm.

At my callback, everyone was very friendly, but most associates were not convincing about it being a good place to work. I usually ask why a person is staying at a firm during interviews to see if they can convincingly say good things about the firm. At STB all of the associates specifically said they were looking forward to leaving the firm.

That seems to be in line with what I've been hearing. I've been told of at least one person who jumped ship to PI/government even though they were entirely corporate, just so they could get away from STB. The associates manning their hospitality suite at my OCI also mentioned how there was a department (I forget which specifically) that had to pull in associates from other departments because there were constant fire drills going on; it gave me the impression that they were understaffed and therefore overworking people.

Not sure any of this is unique to STB versus its peer firms. Some people just realize they can’t stand biglaw or private practice in general and jump to a better environment as soon as they can (usually you get some folks leaving asap in their first year, then a wave in years 3-4, then a wave in years 6-7). Firms are also notoriously terrible at managing staffing (leading to chronic over or under staffing in specific practice groups).

When I think of a firm that you’d want to avoid, it would be one that’s financially unstable, is a terrible place to work relative to peer firms, or some combination of the two. I would not put STB in that category.

[Anonymous User]

STB NY

I heard they're taking anyone this year. I know my lower T14 has some questionable students who just got offers.

Mods please ban this poster. For this nonsense.

I mean I would possibly argue the same, not because of any nonsense about their standards, but because I've heard some pretty awful things about working there. I'm under the impression that the attorneys there are really friendly people, but I've heard that they're burning through associates at an even higher rate than the usual for BigLaw, and during OCI a lot of people mentioned hearing similarly negative things about the firm.

At my callback, everyone was very friendly, but most associates were not convincing about it being a good place to work. I usually ask why a person is staying at a firm during interviews to see if they can convincingly say good things about the firm. At STB all of the associates specifically said they were looking forward to leaving the firm.

That seems to be in line with what I've been hearing. I've been told of at least one person who jumped ship to PI/government even though they were entirely corporate, just so they could get away from STB. The associates manning their hospitality suite at my OCI also mentioned how there was a department (I forget which specifically) that had to pull in associates from other departments because there were constant fire drills going on; it gave me the impression that they were understaffed and therefore overworking people.

Not sure any of this is unique to STB versus its peer firms. Some people just realize they can’t stand biglaw or private practice in general and jump to a better environment as soon as they can (usually you get some folks leaving asap in their first year, then a wave in years 3-4, then a wave in years 6-7). Firms are also notoriously terrible at managing staffing (leading to chronic over or under staffing in specific practice groups).

When I think of a firm that you’d want to avoid, it would be one that’s financially unstable, is a terrible place to work relative to peer firms, or some combination of the two. I would not put STB in that category.

What I'm trying to say is that I've been told STB does fall into the category of "terrible place to work relative to peer firms." The person jumping ship that I mentioned returned to private practice within 2 years; it wasn't that they couldn't handle biglaw as a general matter, just STB. Upperclassmen have also given me advice along the lines of run for the hills. That said, I will admit that all this is hearsay, and that given STB's peer group (S&C, Cravath, Skadden) it might not be materially worse than those firms.