Top Law Schools

Primarily interested in appellate litigation with the opportunity for some occasional white collar litigation. Also concerned about which firm will bring me closer to a good appellate clerkship.

relevant to my interests

Anyone have any specific input on why one of these over the other? Wilmer's appellate practice is comparable to Gibson's, no? I'm also interested in whether any of these are known for better quality of life.

Anonymous User wrote:Primarily interested in appellate litigation with the opportunity for some occasional white collar litigation. Also concerned about which firm will bring me closer to a good appellate clerkship.

WH or W&C. GD shouldn't be doing as well as it is.

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone have any specific input on why one of these over the other? Wilmer's appellate practice is comparable to Gibson's, no? I'm also interested in whether any of these are known for better quality of life.

WH and GD's appellate practice are comparable, with a recent edge to WH in sheer number of cases and wins. QOL does not exist at any of these places. For white-collar work, W&C is the winner, but WH has a really strong white-collar practice.

Personally, I would take W&C, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to take WH. GD really shouldn't be much of a contender.

Blindmelon wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Primarily interested in appellate litigation with the opportunity for some occasional white collar litigation. Also concerned about which firm will bring me closer to a good appellate clerkship.

WH or W&C. GD shouldn't be doing as well as it is.

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone have any specific input on why one of these over the other? Wilmer's appellate practice is comparable to Gibson's, no? I'm also interested in whether any of these are known for better quality of life.

WH and GD's appellate practice are comparable, with a recent edge to WH in sheer number of cases and wins. QOL does not exist at any of these places. For white-collar work, W&C is the winner, but WH has a really strong white-collar practice.

Personally, I would take W&C, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to take WH. GD really shouldn't be much of a contender.

What's the reasoning for the bolded statement?

How sure are you of COA clerkship? I'd imagine getting into the appellate practice at GDC DC is highly competitive. If I was interested in appellate and white collar, and didn't get into the appellate practice at GDC DC, I'd rather be at W&C.

rayiner wrote:How sure are you of COA clerkship? I'd imagine getting into the appellate practice at GDC DC is highly competitive. If I was interested in appellate and white collar, and didn't get into the appellate practice at GDC DC, I'd rather be at W&C.

I think I have a decent shot, but by no means certain. I'm wondering if working in any of these three places would be best for making the connections that might get me to the COA clerkship. GDC swears that its not competitve to do appellate work there, but I'm skeptical.

Anonymous User wrote:

Blindmelon wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Primarily interested in appellate litigation with the opportunity for some occasional white collar litigation. Also concerned about which firm will bring me closer to a good appellate clerkship.

WH or W&C. GD shouldn't be doing as well as it is.

Anonymous User wrote:Anyone have any specific input on why one of these over the other? Wilmer's appellate practice is comparable to Gibson's, no? I'm also interested in whether any of these are known for better quality of life.

WH and GD's appellate practice are comparable, with a recent edge to WH in sheer number of cases and wins. QOL does not exist at any of these places. For white-collar work, W&C is the winner, but WH has a really strong white-collar practice.

Personally, I would take W&C, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to take WH. GD really shouldn't be much of a contender.

What's the reasoning for the bolded statement?

WH/GD are comparable for appellate, with WH having a clear edge in DC White Collar. Also, Gibson's strength as a firm is not in DC (although their DC office is strong), while WH is among the best.

I would still take W&C though, because of what Ray said, but also because it would be a fantastic launching point for your career.

Anonymous User wrote:

rayiner wrote:How sure are you of COA clerkship? I'd imagine getting into the appellate practice at GDC DC is highly competitive. If I was interested in appellate and white collar, and didn't get into the appellate practice at GDC DC, I'd rather be at W&C.

I think I have a decent shot, but by no means certain. I'm wondering if working in any of these three places would be best for making the connections that might get me to the COA clerkship. GDC swears that its not competitve to do appellate work there, but I'm skeptical.

Meeting people that clerked with judges to get an insider scoop/phone call certainly helps. If you summer at W&C -> COA clerkship, you can try for WH/GD afterwards.