S&C (NY) v. Wilmer Hale (Boston) v. Cravath (NY) v. Selendy Gay (NY) v. Susman Godfrey (NY) Forum

[Anonymous User]

Susman is head and shoulders the best in NYC, but if you want to work in Boston, you should go for Wilmer. Cravath and S&C are basically even. Selendy is not really an elite boutique in a meaningful sense.

None of these are great options for appellate, but Wilmer is probably the best. S&C has a good but DC-based and conservative-leaning appellate practice.

I would not let the clerkship thing affect your decision much; that sounds really idiosyncratic to me, albeit I’m not clerking for a liberal judge. Susman is the only firm here that would stand out on a clerkship app, though I agree that firms don’t matter much.

Not sure this is a fair statement. Sure, none are band 1 Chambers ranked, but Wilmer is band 2 and a great option for appellate by any measure.

Wilmer historically has had an elite practice but its lone star partner (Seth Waxman) is aging out and imo has noticeably struggled in his recent SCOTUS arguments. I think it's now a solid but not superb option. I'm also fairly sure it was Band 1 until recently but has been downgraded, though of course I don't memorize the Chambers rankings.

[Anonymous User]

Hi OP. My only advice is to resist the boutique hivemind. I worked in both biglaw and litigation boutiques for years and neither is superior to the other in terms of being "the best" for litigators. There are pros and cons to both, people with great credentials at both, skills you sharpen at one place that you won't sharpen as well at the other, etc. Talk to people at Susman and the white shoe firms you get into for a more complete picture.

[Anonymous User]

Hi OP. My only advice is to resist the boutique hivemind. I worked in both biglaw and litigation boutiques for years and neither is superior to the other in terms of being "the best" for litigators. There are pros and cons to both, people with great credentials at both, skills you sharpen at one place that you won't sharpen as well at the other, etc. Talk to people at Susman and the white shoe firms you get into for a more complete picture.

[Anonymous User]

Susman only takes people who previously clerked. Appellate work is tough to get into. I would pick one of the regular shops you listed - be it S&C, Wilmer, Cravath, or Selendy. Keep your grades up in 2L and apply broadly, and see what happens with clerkships. No firm will give you a material advantage in clerkship applications.

Agree with this. I summered at Susman and am currently a COA clerk and I don't see how your 2L firm would impact your clerkship chances much at all. Plus isn't Susman's summer program only four weeks? You could just split between Susman and Cravath or S&C. Also keep in mind that many people work for a year before clerking, so you'd presumably go back to the non-Susman firm for that gap year anyway (as they generally don't hire anyone pre-clerkship).

It seems that currently only S&C allows splitting summer, out of all the big law firms listed. Would this be a tie breaker between the decision of choosing S&C over Cravath, despite S&C's role in Trump's EOs? I know that this might be getting a bit too trivial, but I just wanted to know to what extent people find S&C's actions problematic, and to what extent it would impact my career. Of course, I also need to do some soul searching myself to see if I'm comfortable joining them. My counter-argument would be that at least at S&C I don't have to work on the pro bono cases that the other capitulators agreed to do?

Poster you replied to. If you get the Susman offer, then S&C and Susman would be a great split. Are you sure Wilmer doesn't allow splits? You should check on LinkedIn and see which firms Susman summers split at in the past -- many firms will have a formal "no split" policy but will make exceptions, especially since you'd only be doing four weeks at Susman. For instance I see at least one person who split Susman and Cravath (although maybe they did a full 10 weeks at Cravath and 4 at Susman, or did a non-NYC Susman office, which can matter). In terms of S&C, my Dem-appointed judge wouldn't care if you summered there, though that's just one anecdote.

[Anonymous User]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

[Anonymous User]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

[cartmanbrah123]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

Is there really a meaningful difference between S&C and Cravath? I'm a bit worried about Cravath's hours, but is it really much worse than that of S&C? Would Cravath's rotation system not helpful if I want to work 2-3 years before a clerkship?

[cartmanbrah123]

Susman only takes people who previously clerked. Appellate work is tough to get into. I would pick one of the regular shops you listed - be it S&C, Wilmer, Cravath, or Selendy. Keep your grades up in 2L and apply broadly, and see what happens with clerkships. No firm will give you a material advantage in clerkship applications.

Agree with this. I summered at Susman and am currently a COA clerk and I don't see how your 2L firm would impact your clerkship chances much at all. Plus isn't Susman's summer program only four weeks? You could just split between Susman and Cravath or S&C. Also keep in mind that many people work for a year before clerking, so you'd presumably go back to the non-Susman firm for that gap year anyway (as they generally don't hire anyone pre-clerkship).

It seems that currently only S&C allows splitting summer, out of all the big law firms listed. Would this be a tie breaker between the decision of choosing S&C over Cravath, despite S&C's role in Trump's EOs? I know that this might be getting a bit too trivial, but I just wanted to know to what extent people find S&C's actions problematic, and to what extent it would impact my career. Of course, I also need to do some soul searching myself to see if I'm comfortable joining them. My counter-argument would be that at least at S&C I don't have to work on the pro bono cases that the other capitulators agreed to do?

Poster you replied to. If you get the Susman offer, then S&C and Susman would be a great split. Are you sure Wilmer doesn't allow splits? You should check on LinkedIn and see which firms Susman summers split at in the past -- many firms will have a formal "no split" policy but will make exceptions, especially since you'd only be doing four weeks at Susman. For instance I see at least one person who split Susman and Cravath (although maybe they did a full 10 weeks at Cravath and 4 at Susman, or did a non-NYC Susman office, which can matter). In terms of S&C, my Dem-appointed judge wouldn't care if you summered there, though that's just one anecdote.

Wilmer doesn't allow splits, and they don't even allow splitting between their own offices, so they really care about your commitment to both the firm and the office. And yeah, I think the Susman-Cravath splits are usually 10 at Cravath and 4 at Susman. But can Cravath really tell me not to go to Susman even after I finish my summer with Cravath? Or can they only say no when I ask to shorten my summer with them to accommodate summer with another firm?

[Anonymous User]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

Is there really a meaningful difference between S&C and Cravath? I'm a bit worried about Cravath's hours, but is it really much worse than that of S&C? Would Cravath's rotation system not helpful if I want to work 2-3 years before a clerkship?

I think Cravath's hours are worse than S&C, but probably not by a ton. I think the reputation difference is worth it. I know lit associates and NEPs at K&E who say Cravath is the only BigLaw firm (I.e., excluding boutiques) that consistently billed more, but they also maintained basically all the peer lit groups (V10, Chambers Band 1-type) billed basically the same. Can't say if they were right or not. I think some of the older judges might think of Cravath as better than S&C due to its historically being better, but like others on this sub I don't think your firm makes a difference for clerkships.

[Anonymous User]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

Is there really a meaningful difference between S&C and Cravath? I'm a bit worried about Cravath's hours, but is it really much worse than that of S&C? Would Cravath's rotation system not helpful if I want to work 2-3 years before a clerkship?

There isn't. This forum has a few anons lurking around who are pulling for Cravath as some sort of shining firm that rises above the rest of NYC biglaw. That being said I would work for Cravath over S&C because... well it's S&C.

[cartmanbrah123]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

Is there really a meaningful difference between S&C and Cravath? I'm a bit worried about Cravath's hours, but is it really much worse than that of S&C? Would Cravath's rotation system not helpful if I want to work 2-3 years before a clerkship?

There isn't. This forum has a few anons lurking around who are pulling for Cravath as some sort of shining firm that rises above the rest of NYC biglaw. That being said I would work for Cravath over S&C because... well it's S&C.

Care to elaborate?

[Anonymous User]

There's no reason to pick Selendy or Sullivan and Cromwell as the least prestigious firms by far on this list

Is there really a meaningful difference between S&C and Cravath? I'm a bit worried about Cravath's hours, but is it really much worse than that of S&C? Would Cravath's rotation system not helpful if I want to work 2-3 years before a clerkship?

There isn't. This forum has a few anons lurking around who are pulling for Cravath as some sort of shining firm that rises above the rest of NYC biglaw. That being said I would work for Cravath over S&C because... well it's S&C.

Lol, the derangement syndrome strikes again! Maybe this year Vault will FINALLY reflect what you know is so obviously true