Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

(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: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:43 pm

Posting for a friend going through OCI. What firm do you think she should pick? She has a finance background and is leaning towards Cahill for their Lev fin practice. They said that most of their associates go in-house to banks. Also pays above market according to research I've done. Downsides?

Advised against Cadwalader because of some of the stuff I've read about downsizing and no-offers. Don't know much about stroock. Fried frank will probably have more variety of work compared to Cahill. Any one familiar with the firms with input would be highly appreciated.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Posting for a friend going through OCI. What firm do you think she should pick? She has a finance background and is leaning towards Cahill for their Lev fin practice. They said that most of their associates go in-house to banks. Also pays above market according to research I've done. Downsides?

Advised against Cadwalader because of some of the stuff I've read about downsizing and no-offers. Don't know much about stroock. Fried frank will probably have more variety of work compared to Cahill. Any one familiar with the firms with input would be highly appreciated.

Which market? NY?

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:13 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Posting for a friend going through OCI. What firm do you think she should pick? She has a finance background and is leaning towards Cahill for their Lev fin practice. They said that most of their associates go in-house to banks. Also pays above market according to research I've done. Downsides?

Advised against Cadwalader because of some of the stuff I've read about downsizing and no-offers. Don't know much about stroock. Fried frank will probably have more variety of work compared to Cahill. Any one familiar with the firms with input would be highly appreciated.

Which market? NY?


Yes, all NY.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:10 pm

FWIW I was a summer at Cad and have nothing but good things to say. Nobody got no offered from my class and it was a good atmosphere. If your friend wants to go inhouse to a bank eventually I wouldn't take it off the table. Cadwalader associates go to banks regularly. For securitization and derivatives work you can't get much better. Plus downtown > midtown.

Dont think you can really go wrong with any of those options really though.

FascinatedWanderer

Bronze
Posts: 293
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:12 pm

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby FascinatedWanderer » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:11 pm

These are all relatively mediocre NYC corporate shops, but only one of them has an atrocious reputation. Don't go to that one.

User avatar
zhenders

Silver
Posts: 942
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:21 pm

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby zhenders » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:35 pm

I have friends at FF NY. They speak very highly of the firm, and feel it to be a genuinely inclusive place to work, for all people there. If that's an important consideration for her, I'd take that into account.

CiFULA

New
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:15 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby CiFULA » Tue Oct 03, 2017 12:10 am

unless any of the firms moved in recent years, they are all located downtown. i think this goes down to ff and cahill. if your friend is sure she's interested in lev fin, cahill. otherwise ff for the broader scope of work.

User avatar
Wild Card

Bronze
Posts: 422
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 6:48 pm

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Wild Card » Tue Oct 03, 2017 12:21 am

Likewise, I'd narrow it down to Cahill and FF immediately, and decide whether I'd want the open assignment system, or whatever FF has (presumably not the open assignment system).

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:48 am

Cahill

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:23 am

I was a Stroock associate for 3 years. Overall, a good experience and I ended up with a very good exit option. From a pure size perspective, I suppose it barely qualifies as "biglaw" these days, but they did pay market + market bonus when I was there. Happy to answer any specific questions about the firm.

I would echo others who advised staying away from Cadwalader.

charliekelly33

New
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:35 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby charliekelly33 » Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:25 am

I have a friend that just started at FF and they are putting four associates to an office... that's tough

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:53 am

Anonymous User wrote:I was a Stroock associate for 3 years. Overall, a good experience and I ended up with a very good exit option. From a pure size perspective, I suppose it barely qualifies as "biglaw" these days, but they did pay market + market bonus when I was there. Happy to answer any specific questions about the firm.

I would echo others who advised staying away from Cadwalader.


What were your hours like at Stroock? Where do people generally exit to?

She's not sure if she likes lev fin, but Cahill is very well regarded for it, right? Sounds like of the four firms, it has the strongest reputation, even if its only one thing it does well. Wouldn't it be wise to do that and then lateral to another big law firm that wants to build up its finance practice? Of course this assumes that she will like it, but I've heard of people lateral to "v10-v20" firms using the above method, whatever that means.

nonsharepartner

New
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:07 pm

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby nonsharepartner » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:05 pm

Unless your friend wants to do bank finance or capital markets, he/she should avoid Cahill. Even if there are other groups there, most people go into those groups so chances are he/she will as well. However, it (leveraged finance) is a great practice area that always needs people at every firm and Cahill is on the short list for the best in that area so your friend could lateral out without a problem.

FF is a great choice for a mixture of corporate work and they are doing very well as a firm. They have a longer runway and not really an up or out culture so people hang around for a while.

I am not sure about Cadwalder other than bank finance/securitization/derivatives. I am sure they do more than that and probably give a decent experience but that atmosphere there is pretty rough right now in terms or morale. They do let you transfer offices to Charlotte (or so I am told) so that would be a decent move/option once you outgrow NYC.

Strook - nothing I can add there.

Would probably go FF if it were me.

1styearlateral

Silver
Posts: 834
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:55 pm

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby 1styearlateral » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW I was a summer at Cad and have nothing but good things to say. Nobody got no offered from my class and it was a good atmosphere. If your friend wants to go inhouse to a bank eventually I wouldn't take it off the table. Cadwalader associates go to banks regularly. For securitization and derivatives work you can't get much better. Plus downtown > midtown.

Dont think you can really go wrong with any of those options really though.

None of these firms are in midtown.

FF and Stroock have great NYC-specific real estate practices and probably don't have the clout in finance that the other two have.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 03, 2017 4:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I was a Stroock associate for 3 years. Overall, a good experience and I ended up with a very good exit option. From a pure size perspective, I suppose it barely qualifies as "biglaw" these days, but they did pay market + market bonus when I was there. Happy to answer any specific questions about the firm.

I would echo others who advised staying away from Cadwalader.


What were your hours like at Stroock? Where do people generally exit to?

She's not sure if she likes lev fin, but Cahill is very well regarded for it, right? Sounds like of the four firms, it has the strongest reputation, even if its only one thing it does well. Wouldn't it be wise to do that and then lateral to another big law firm that wants to build up its finance practice? Of course this assumes that she will like it, but I've heard of people lateral to "v10-v20" firms using the above method, whatever that means.


I usually worked 9-7:30 or so with a couple hours on most weekends. There'd be some busy weeks with late nights (usually no later than 12:00) and the occasional all day on the weekend. Overall, it was actually pretty humane for NYC biglaw. The partners were reasonably sensitive to personal commitments and the like.

Hard to say what a "general" exit was. I went in-house, and I knew a decent number of people who did that. There was a decent smattering of government folk. Of course, people also lateraled to other biglaw for various reasons- wouldn't have been hard to go to v10-20 if I had really wanted to. I left to relocate for family.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 03, 2017 11:37 pm

former NYC Cad associate here. avoid CWT like the plague. was there for two years and hated it. The 2015 NYC summer class had 25 people in NYC. almost half have already left the firm within the first year. the associate turnover rate is astonishing and the place is toxic. they have a terrible reputation for a reason and treat their associates terribly.

Have heard good things about Cahill and FF from law school friends.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:10 pm

Cadwalader NYC is never the right choice.

Anonymous User
Posts: 324699
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Cahill v. Fried Frank v. Stroock v. Cadwalader

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:17 pm

I would definitely not go to Cad or Strook. I would pick Cahill for LevFin work and FF for M&A or real estate.



Return to “Legal Employment�

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.