Top Law Schools

I understand that these firms cover a bit of a range in the V-100 in terms of prestige and practice strengths, but I'm hoping to get insight into firm culture, prospects, and QoL here. These are all in NY, by the way.

I consider myself to be rather laid back and personable - I honestly want to have friends at work, and senior associates/partners who are willing to mentor me. I want to avoid a cutthroat atmosphere if possible. I'm interested in litigation, but I'm not married to the idea. I understand I'll be working hard at any V-100 firm, and that there are relative gains to be had in terms of opportunity and compensation. However, I'm wary of Skadden-esque sweatshop reputations (ie keeping a pillow at work for frequent all-nighters).

If anyone can give any insight or suggestions, I would really appreciate it.

OP here: I know people are voting, but I would love a short explanation as to why you chose which firm. Thanks!

K&E and Paul Hastings have two very different personalities/cultures. The contrast is huge. Which culture do you fit into better? If you didn't notice a cultural difference at your callbacks, I recommend going in for a second look at each firm to pin down the personality differences. Schulte's culture perhaps falls somewhere between the two - not as high intensity as K&E, but perhaps higher energy than Paul Hastings. I know nothing about Dewey.

edit: I'm *not* talking about hours billed or anything. I'm talking about the general personality of the firm. K&E lawyers tend to be high-intensity people; Paul Hastings people tend to be pretty mellow. Paul Hastings is actually TOO mellow for me - at my CB, I found them a bit boring.

At this point, it's not between two firms of equal caliber, one offering an intense atmosphere and the other offering a more lifestyle-like hours requirement. It's between a firm that, while very intense, offers excellent job security, stability, and great exit options, and firms that don't. Aside from that, the others don't quite match up with that firm on practice group strength, either (unless you realllly want to do hedge fund work at Schulte).

Go with Kirkland.

If you're really that laid back, you might end up hating Kirkland. Everyone is pretty Type-A/stab you in the front.

Anonymous User wrote:At this point, it's not between two firms of equal caliber, one offering an intense atmosphere and the other offering a more lifestyle-like hours requirement. It's between a firm that, while very intense, offers excellent job security, stability, and great exit options, and firms that don't. Aside from that, the others don't quite match up with that firm on practice group strength, either (unless you realllly want to do hedge fund work at Schulte).

Go with Kirkland.

+1.

Your exit options will be vastly better from K&E no matter what you do. That alone should seal it.

Anonymous User wrote:If you're really that laid back, you might end up hating Kirkland. Everyone is pretty Type-A/stab you in the front.

I was also under the impression that it can be a bit of a sweatshop. Seems like a place not well suited for OP.

1) No firm in New York that purports to be a "big" firm is not a sweatshop. Even if there are such firms in the city, Paul Hastings is decidedly not one of them.
2) I'm shocked at how short the memories of some people are here. People who are saying Paul Hastings is laid back: In 2009, the firm announced, two weeks before the summer program ended that they were giving offers to 70%-75% of the class. I leave you to imagine how laid back it was for the remainder of the program.
3) Aside from pitting summer associates against each other (just a universally shitty move), the firm has engaged in several rounds of layoffs (K&E did only a round, and that too not many were let go), and has deferred half of the class of 2010 to January 2011. My sources at Paul Hastings are still uncertain as to whether more layoffs are on the way.

http://abovethelaw.com/2009/08/paul-has ... fer-rates/

Anonymous User wrote:K&E and Paul Hastings have two very different personalities/cultures. The contrast is huge. Which culture do you fit into better? If you didn't notice a cultural difference at your callbacks, I recommend going in for a second look at each firm to pin down the personality differences. Schulte's culture perhaps falls somewhere between the two - not as high intensity as K&E, but perhaps higher energy than Paul Hastings. I know nothing about Dewey.

edit: I'm *not* talking about hours billed or anything. I'm talking about the general personality of the firm. K&E lawyers tend to be high-intensity people; Paul Hastings people tend to be pretty mellow. Paul Hastings is actually TOO mellow for me - at my CB, I found them a bit boring.

Though this might vary between offices - PH in DC seemed more gunner and K&E in DC seemed more laid back. Not sure about NYC, but from what I've read on Vault it seems the consensus is with me across the board.

Anonymous User wrote:K&E and Paul Hastings have two very different personalities/cultures. The contrast is huge. Which culture do you fit into better? If you didn't notice a cultural difference at your callbacks, I recommend going in for a second look at each firm to pin down the personality differences. Schulte's culture perhaps falls somewhere between the two - not as high intensity as K&E, but perhaps higher energy than Paul Hastings. I know nothing about Dewey.

edit: I'm *not* talking about hours billed or anything. I'm talking about the general personality of the firm. K&E lawyers tend to be high-intensity people; Paul Hastings people tend to be pretty mellow. Paul Hastings is actually TOO mellow for me - at my CB, I found them a bit boring.

OP again. I agree with your assessment of PH's "mellowness" - it seemed a little too mellow for me as well, as well as a little less friendly. I was also a little concerned by the fact that I didn't meet with any women during my PH CB. I mean, out of four interviewers? I understand that the playing field has evened out for women lawyers in the last few decades, but it's still a concern for me, and I appreciated being able to ask attorneys at the other firms about their career paths and w/l balance.

Anonymous User wrote:1) No firm in New York that purports to be a "big" firm is not a sweatshop. Even if there are such firms in the city, Paul Hastings is decidedly not one of them.
2) I'm shocked at how short the memories of some people are here. People who are saying Paul Hastings is laid back: In 2009, the firm announced, two weeks before the summer program ended that they were giving offers to 70%-75% of the class. I leave you to imagine how laid back it was for the remainder of the program.
3) Aside from pitting summer associates against each other (just a universally shitty move), the firm has engaged in several rounds of layoffs (K&E did only a round, and that too not many were let go), and has deferred half of the class of 2010 to January 2011. My sources at Paul Hastings are still uncertain as to whether more layoffs are on the way.

http://abovethelaw.com/2009/08/paul-has ... fer-rates/

The layoffs at PH concerned me as well. I was also pretty shocked by their NALP data (in re: 70% offer rate), which was much lower than K&E's.

Is it really a contest between PH and K&E at this point? I think I prefer the culture at K&E to PH, but I really liked the cultures at the other firms as well.

Anonymous User wrote:If you're really that laid back, you might end up hating Kirkland. Everyone is pretty Type-A/stab you in the front.

But I voted for K&E anyway. They subsidize your gym membership for the summer. And Equinox is expensive.

FWIW, K&E Chicago and K&E NY are two totally different beasts. A lot of the "type A" reputation is attributable to the former rather than the latter. That said, K&E NY did conduct "performance" layoffs, which is always a shitty thing to do, regardless of how many/few people were affected.

If you are going elsewhere, at least avoid PH. Here's an example of why.

None of these are anything really close to "lifestyle" firms. If you want to lateral into one as a partner, I would suggest K&E.

Anonymous User wrote:K&E and Paul Hastings have two very different personalities/cultures. The contrast is huge. Which culture do you fit into better? If you didn't notice a cultural difference at your callbacks, I recommend going in for a second look at each firm to pin down the personality differences. Schulte's culture perhaps falls somewhere between the two - not as high intensity as K&E, but perhaps higher energy than Paul Hastings. I know nothing about Dewey.

edit: I'm *not* talking about hours billed or anything. I'm talking about the general personality of the firm. K&E lawyers tend to be high-intensity people; Paul Hastings people tend to be pretty mellow. Paul Hastings is actually TOO mellow for me - at my CB, I found them a bit boring.

if the difference between cultures are so drastic, how did OP get offers from all of them? you're making generalizations off 4-5 30 minute meetings with some attorneys. ugh

Anonymous User wrote:If you are going elsewhere, at least avoid PH. Here's an example of why.

Holy shit. Paul Hastings's partnership is comprised of one solid collection of assholes.

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, K&E Chicago and K&E NY are two totally different beasts. A lot of the "type A" reputation is attributable to the former rather than the latter. That said, K&E NY did conduct "performance" layoffs, which is always a shitty thing to do, regardless of how many/few people were affected.

If you are going elsewhere, at least avoid PH. Here's an example of why.

Would you recommend Schulte or Dewey, then?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, K&E Chicago and K&E NY are two totally different beasts. A lot of the "type A" reputation is attributable to the former rather than the latter. That said, K&E NY did conduct "performance" layoffs, which is always a shitty thing to do, regardless of how many/few people were affected.

If you are going elsewhere, at least avoid PH. Here's an example of why.

Would you recommend Schulte or Dewey, then?

I would just go to K&E.

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, K&E Chicago and K&E NY are two totally different beasts. A lot of the "type A" reputation is attributable to the former rather than the latter. That said, K&E NY did conduct "performance" layoffs, which is always a shitty thing to do, regardless of how many/few people were affected.

How can you act like this is a huge black mark? Most firms, at this point, have conducted performance layoffs. This includes 4 of the V5 and 8 of the V10. Unless OP has WLRK, Munger, W&C, Susman, etc. on the table, I don't see how stealth layoffs serve as a useful distinguishing factor–though, multiple rounds of layoffs do.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:FWIW, K&E Chicago and K&E NY are two totally different beasts. A lot of the "type A" reputation is attributable to the former rather than the latter. That said, K&E NY did conduct "performance" layoffs, which is always a shitty thing to do, regardless of how many/few people were affected.

If you are going elsewhere, at least avoid PH. Here's an example of why.

Would you recommend Schulte or Dewey, then?

I would just go to K&E.

Any particular reason why?