SullCrom v Simpson v going to OCI Forum

[Anonymous User]

This list seems weird. Covington and Wilmer in band 2? I was under the impression that they were market leaders in the space, but that might be the halo from their DC offices.

That's a NY ranking. Both are Band 1 in DC:

https://chambers.com/legal-rankings/lit ... 95:12246:1

No I specifically meant Cov/Wilmer NY. I thought they would def be band 1 for White Collar/Internal Investigations in NY.

Ya, idk I don’t do white collar or even lit.

I wouldn’t pretend to be knowledgeable enough on the industry to parse the nuances of the chambers rankings.

What I DO know is that vault is a terrible way to assess the strength of practice areas and chambers will almost always be the best resource for that.

Agree that vault is terrible. But what is chambers' methodology? It has Susman as band 3 in general commercial lit in NY.

It’s based on input from clients.

It’s true that firms try to game it a bit, but it’s also definitely the best, most accurate practice area ranking available.

Interesting. Does it disfavor smaller firms? All the boutiques I looked at are lower than would seem accurate. (Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Bartlit Beck.)

No, chambers is a fairly comprehensive review, and if a practitioner in their field is really that strong (and perceived as much by clients and peers), they are ranked accordingly.

TLS posters in shambles, etc.

[Anonymous User]

That's a NY ranking. Both are Band 1 in DC:

https://chambers.com/legal-rankings/lit ... 95:12246:1

No I specifically meant Cov/Wilmer NY. I thought they would def be band 1 for White Collar/Internal Investigations in NY.

Ya, idk I don’t do white collar or even lit.

I wouldn’t pretend to be knowledgeable enough on the industry to parse the nuances of the chambers rankings.

What I DO know is that vault is a terrible way to assess the strength of practice areas and chambers will almost always be the best resource for that.

Agree that vault is terrible. But what is chambers' methodology? It has Susman as band 3 in general commercial lit in NY.

It’s based on input from clients.

It’s true that firms try to game it a bit, but it’s also definitely the best, most accurate practice area ranking available.

Interesting. Does it disfavor smaller firms? All the boutiques I looked at are lower than would seem accurate. (Susman, Kellogg Hansen, Bartlit Beck.)

No, chambers is a fairly comprehensive review, and if a practitioner in their field is really that strong (and perceived as much by clients and peers), they are ranked accordingly.

TLS posters in shambles, etc.

Also keep in mind who they're asking - GCs at Fortune 500's, VP legals at top 20 PE funds, etc. They'll work closely with and be represented by K&E, Gibson, STB, etc. Susman/Quinn they'll see on the other side of very high profile, high value disputes and think "wow those guys are great" but never hire them. Quinn less so now, but you get the point.

Chambers works for the big firms where everyone in the market knows who they are - but for Bartlit/Susman, ask an average 6th year corporate associate at a V50 - odds are, they'll never have heard of these lit boutiques.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Update: I now have callbacks scheduled with Goodwin, Covington, Latham, and Wilson Sonsini. Thinking of canceling Wilson but otherwise will go forward with them. Simpson seems to be getting impatient so I may just turn them down. SullCrom is increasingly tempting to take.

I've been mostly relying on Chambers NorCal rankings and vibes for figuring out who to keep and who to reject for CBs.

[Anonymous User]

Bartlit is Band 1 in both Illinois and Colorado gen comm lit, and Band 2 in nationwide mass torts, which you would imagine would be a particularly boutique-unfriendly ranking. If anything it’s maybe overranked, as my understanding is that they do very little actual Colorado work.

Susman New York is pretty small, and my understanding is that Susman as a whole is not all that focused on the general commercial market, so I’m not surprised by its NY ranking.

They do favor raw market share to a degree. For example, highest-quality and most-profitable-per-lawyer lit practice in my (small) market is not Band 1 because it’s a small operation even for the market. And their individual ranks are heavily tilted towards older rainmakers (“up and coming” often means 45 year old in Chambersese). But it’s still much, much better than anything else.

[Anonymous User]

OP bumping this, because I just got an offer from Covington. Unfortunately my callback with them was virtual so I don't have a great sense of the culture but I am interested because of the high amount of pro bono people do and the white collar focus. I'm going back to SullCrom for a second look this week and will try to do the same at the other two firms.

[Anonymous User]

Top 30%ish at a lower t14, sitting on offers at Sullivan & Cromwell and Simpson Thacher Bay Area. I'm interested in litigation (white collar + regular civil lit). First of all, any vibes about the two offices? I got an overall better feel from SullCrom but liked people at both offices. Another X factor is that Simpson offered me a 7.5k signing bonus, but only if I get back to them by August 5th.

Second, do you guys think that I should choose from between these two offers, or keep on interviewing? I have a CB at Goodwin next week. My main concern is neither SullCrom nor Simpson seems to be particularly highly regarded for white collar, which is a practice area I'd like to do at least a bit in. OTOH, they're very respected firms overall.

Anyway, I'm feeling pretty lost with all this and would love any input.

May I ask how did you get the signing bonus from Simpson? Is that a regular thing offered by Simpson in pre-OCI?

Yes