S&C (NY) v. Deb (NY) Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm really stuck at making a decision as to what firm I should choose for next summer. I thought the people were much more human at Debevoise, and they sold me on their culture. On the other hand, S&C would probably allow for more solid exit options and definitely is the more prestigious of the two. I really think that I am leaning towards litigation at this point, I worked as a summer associate at a different firm this summer and had the opportunity to do both corporate and litigation assignments. In that regard, I think that S&C would be better for general litigation, and Debevoise may be a better choice for some investigations or white collar. I'd appreciate any input from TLS!

[Anonymous User]

Do you have a preference between a "choose your own adventure" system, where you generally get projects by approaching seniors (with a formal assignment system backstop) (S&C), or a "mandatory assignment" system, where you don't need to seek out any work (in fact, are banned from approaching seniors for work) and simply take whatever the formal assignment system gives you (Deb)?

Have you done second looks at both firms, and in particular met with the white collar folks at both?

P.S. Congrats on your great offers!

[Anonymous User]

one important difference is downtown v. midtown.

if the only plus to debevoise to you is culture, i'd go with s&c. it's really, really hard to judge what the people and culture are like at a particular firm. there's hundreds of people at each and you've interacted with (i assume) a single-digit number of pre-selected people, in an unnatural setting, for ~45 minutes each. my perception at OCI of the culture of the firm i went to was completely different from reality. further, even if there are cultural differences between the two places, the variance within each firm means that you will almost certainly find your people anyhow. the flipside of that is that even if you go to the one with the more suitable culture, you can be put on a team with very difficult people.

also, if you don't have previous experience with investigations, or know for certain that's what you want to do, i wouldn't weight that. i haven't worked on an investigation either, so take this with a grain of salt. but the perception among the associates i know is very negative. i suspect the reason is because investigations involve a great quantity of documents and comparatively little law. oftentimes, the pivotal question isn't was what happened legal, but, did something happen at all? so while normally a discovery attorney would handle rifling through documents, in investigations associates are likelier to be doing such work. several junior associates i know at a v3 were assigned to an investigation and accordingly put on discovery for six months. someone please correct me if i'm wrong that this is likely to happen more with investigations.

in the end, i've heard good and bad about both places. i think if you can have a great time at either, and there's no definitely wrong choice. good luck

[Anonymous User]

one important difference is downtown v. midtown.

if the only plus to debevoise to you is culture, i'd go with s&c. it's really, really hard to judge what the people and culture are like at a particular firm. there's hundreds of people at each and you've interacted with (i assume) a single-digit number of pre-selected people, in an unnatural setting, for ~45 minutes each. my perception at OCI of the culture of the firm i went to was completely different from reality. further, even if there are cultural differences between the two places, the variance within each firm means that you will almost certainly find your people anyhow. the flipside of that is that even if you go to the one with the more suitable culture, you can be put on a team with very difficult people.

I disagree that culture shouldn't be a factor. While it's true that there are probably good and bad people to work with at both firms, a firm that actively works on maintaining a positive culture (Debevoise) will have far fewer bad apples. They've spent the last 10 years+ recruiting people who fit their respectful and genteel philosophy, and so your odds of working with people who are like this are much higher. This is especially true compared to S&C, where I've heard (and seen) that they aren't particularly selective re: the personality of the associates.

The hours are long in Biglaw, but they'll feel infinitely longer if you're slogging through them with people you don't like. Deb has my vote here.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks both for your replies. I haven't done a second look yet. I totally get that it is impossible to discern what culture is like during a callback, and probably even during the summer, I was just speaking generally about the feeling I was getting. I prefer downtown as I'm not crazy about the hustle and bustle, I'd probably look into living in Brooklyn. I'm more interested in general commercial litigation at this point rather than white collar or investigations, I just mentioned them as strengths of each firm. I think that I would like Deb's central assignment system, but really can't tell until I go through the process. To compound the matter, STB called with an offer today as well. I'm not considering them as seriously because of my lack of interest in corporate though.

[Anonymous User]

First anon above. Recommend doing second looks at both. Talk to associates - ask them to describe their firm's culture in their own words. (I've had great success with this question.) Ask what they like or dislike about the assignment system. Is it easy to get on desirable projects (S&C)? Do people often get stuck doing projects they'd rather not do (Deb)? Where do the associates live?

About Deb, if you don't already know, you should be aware that it's difficult to work away from the office, as Deb doesn't provide a firm-issued laptop. You can technically use your own laptop when working remotely, but the system is glitchy.

[Anonymous User]

About Deb, if you don't already know, you should be aware that it's difficult to work away from the office, as Deb doesn't provide a firm-issued laptop. You can technically use your own laptop when working remotely, but the system is glitchy.

Deb doesn't provide a firm-issued laptop, but it does give a $1500 tech stipend (available pre-bar and renews every 3 years) so that you can buy your own laptop. You log in through Citrix, which I've only found to be glitchy when wifi is bad such as during transit. Never really have issues when I'm at home.