Top Law Schools

Thoughts?

All of these are great firms. Is there any specific quality you're looking for in a firm?

I was just going to start this thread recently. Here is my two cents. Of the four, Weil is hands down the king of bankruptcy, and I believe that a lot of the work they do is debtor-side, which I understand to be more challenging. Kirkland also does great work in both lit and BK. However, those two firms have identical Chambers rankings for the two practice areas (Band 1 for Bankruptcy, Band 2 for General Commercial Lit: The Elite). DPW is ranked tops in both categories, but they do more creditor-side bankruptcy work. Paul Weiss's bankruptcy group is a bit behind the others, but it's a firm where litigation truly is the primary focus. I would say if you're primarily interested in bankruptcy, go to Weil, assuming you like the culture. If you're more interested in litigation, I would take Paul Weiss. If you're split equally, Kirkland or DPW. However, keep in mind that there are huge culture differences between these firms, and they operate differently (ex. Kirkland's free market system). I'm struggling with a similar decision, but with some other firms in the mix, and would love to hear if anyone else has something to add.

Anonymous User wrote:All of these are great firms. Is there any specific quality you're looking for in a firm?

In no particular order, considerations include:
1) Partner prospects;
2) Exit options;
3) Honesty in feedback, so I don't get thrown under the bus;
4) Compensation;
5) Hours;
6) Collaborative atmosphere, I don't want to be paranoid all the time;
7) Early responsibility;
8 ) Interesting work; not just serving corporate clients.

Well, I guess this poll equals, "you can't go wrong".

Davis Polk might be band 1 in bankruptcy, but it's not necessarily a reason to go there. Weil and K&E have the lion's share of big time bankruptcy work, with Skadden coming a distant third. All four have great litigation groups.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:All of these are great firms. Is there any specific quality you're looking for in a firm?

In no particular order, considerations include:
1) Partner prospects;
2) Exit options;
3) Honesty in feedback, so I don't get thrown under the bus;
4) Compensation;
5) Hours;
6) Collaborative atmosphere, I don't want to be paranoid all the time;
7) Early responsibility;
8 ) Interesting work; not just serving corporate clients.

1) It's a wash
2) +1 to DPW & Skadden, Weil & K&E are great but for name-recognition DPW/Skadden
3) +1 for Skadden/Weil -1 for DPW - culture plays into this
4) K&E wins because of bonus structure
5) It's a wash
6) +1 to DPW, -1 for Skadden
7) +1 to DPW/Weil/K&E
8 ) ?????? For sheer variety, +1 to DPW - very high level work, big names

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:All of these are great firms. Is there any specific quality you're looking for in a firm?

In no particular order, considerations include:
1) Partner prospects;
2) Exit options;
3) Honesty in feedback, so I don't get thrown under the bus;
4) Compensation;
5) Hours;
6) Collaborative atmosphere, I don't want to be paranoid all the time;
7) Early responsibility;
8 ) Interesting work; not just serving corporate clients.

1) It's a wash
2) +1 to DPW & Skadden, Weil & K&E are great but for name-recognition DPW/Skadden
3) +1 for Skadden/Weil -1 for DPW - culture plays into this
4) K&E wins because of bonus structure
5) It's a wash
6) +1 to DPW, -1 for Skadden
7) +1 to DPW/Weil/K&E
8 ) ?????? For sheer variety, +1 to DPW - very high level work, big names

I think #8 means, litigation work that's not just derivative of the "corporate", e.g. transactional clients. Like what Quinn toots their horn about.

there's a pretty substantial difference between creditor and debtor side work. before making the decision make sure you know more of what the differences mean for your day-to-day practice

Anonymous User wrote:there's a pretty substantial difference between creditor and debtor side work. before making the decision make sure you know more of what the differences mean for your day-to-day practice

Would you mind elaborating on the differences?