Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
I'm considering both for NYC. Not too concerned with prestige, but looking for a positive experience while in Biglaw and hopefully stay at my firm for a long time. Any input would be appreciated.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Based on your criteria, HH is the correct choice. All the happy firms are in One Battery Park.Anonymous User wrote:I'm considering both for NYC. Not too concerned with prestige, but looking for a positive experience while in Biglaw and hopefully stay at my firm for a long time. Any input would be appreciated.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Yeah, HH did extremely well on the recent midlevel associate satisfaction survey.quakeroats wrote:Based on your criteria, HH is the correct choice. All the happy firms are in One Battery Park.Anonymous User wrote:I'm considering both for NYC. Not too concerned with prestige, but looking for a positive experience while in Biglaw and hopefully stay at my firm for a long time. Any input would be appreciated.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Don't know why there's so much anti-Kirkland trolling going on in this forum, particularly based on vague, second-hand information. I worked as an SA at Kirkland NY this summer and everyone was extremely friendly and collegial. I went out for meals and drinks with associates and partners almost every day of the week, and our summer class became incredibly tight (we still do events, even though the program is over). The free-market system inevitably attracts very outgoing, personable people. If someone isn't friendly, people won't want to work with them.Anonymous User wrote:Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
My advice is not to buy into the "someone told me" stories -- go visit the place yourself or contact alumni from your school. If you decide to go un-anonymous, I'll happily PM you with you own experience.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Sat Sep 24, 2011 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
I was only reporting what the Kirkland attorneys themselves told me during my visit. Its not secondhand, and im in no way disparaging them. If anythig, I like that they were willing to be honest and candid about their experiences.
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
You're in for quite a surprise next fall.Anonymous User wrote:Don't know why there's so much anti-Kirkland trolling going on in this forum, particularly based on vague, second-hand information. I worked as an SA at Kirkland NY this summer and everyone was extremely friendly and collegial. I went out for meals and drinks with associates and partners almost every day of the week, and our summer class became incredibly tight (we still do events, even though the program is over). The free-market system inevitably attracts very outgoing, personable people. If someone isn't friendly, people won't want to work with them.Anonymous User wrote:Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
My advice is not to buy into the "someone told me" stories -- go visit the place yourself or contact alumni from your school. If you decide to go un-anonymous, I'll happily PM you with you own experience.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
No, he isn't.quakeroats wrote:You're in for quite a surprise next fall.Anonymous User wrote:Don't know why there's so much anti-Kirkland trolling going on in this forum, particularly based on vague, second-hand information. I worked as an SA at Kirkland NY this summer and everyone was extremely friendly and collegial. I went out for meals and drinks with associates and partners almost every day of the week, and our summer class became incredibly tight (we still do events, even though the program is over). The free-market system inevitably attracts very outgoing, personable people. If someone isn't friendly, people won't want to work with them.Anonymous User wrote:Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
My advice is not to buy into the "someone told me" stories -- go visit the place yourself or contact alumni from your school. If you decide to go un-anonymous, I'll happily PM you with you own experience.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Just because it isn't "feel-good fuzzy," doesn't mean it's hostile. Still a very collegial, friendly place to work. Yes, no one is there to hold your hand, but presumably that's a reason why many choose K&E in the first place.At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment
- MrKappus
- Posts: 1685
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
No.quakeroats wrote:You're in for quite a surprise next fall.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Man, it's amazing how you know that considering you haven't worked anywhere as an associate yet.quakeroats wrote:You're in for quite a surprise next fall.Anonymous User wrote:Don't know why there's so much anti-Kirkland trolling going on in this forum, particularly based on vague, second-hand information. I worked as an SA at Kirkland NY this summer and everyone was extremely friendly and collegial. I went out for meals and drinks with associates and partners almost every day of the week, and our summer class became incredibly tight (we still do events, even though the program is over). The free-market system inevitably attracts very outgoing, personable people. If someone isn't friendly, people won't want to work with them.Anonymous User wrote:Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
My advice is not to buy into the "someone told me" stories -- go visit the place yourself or contact alumni from your school. If you decide to go un-anonymous, I'll happily PM you with you own experience.
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
People choose K&E because it has a high Vault ranking. In general, there's no reason to pick K&E in New York. If you make it in, you'll make it into firms that don't have such a toxic environment for associates.Anonymous User wrote:Just because it isn't "feel-good fuzzy," doesn't mean it's hostile. Still a very collegial, friendly place to work. Yes, no one is there to hold your hand, but presumably that's a reason why many choose K&E in the first place.At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
It isn't toxic at all. You're being a little dramatic.quakeroats wrote:People choose K&E because it has a high Vault ranking. In general, there's no reason to pick K&E in New York. If you make it in, you'll make it into firms that don't have such a toxic environment for associates.Anonymous User wrote:Just because it isn't "feel-good fuzzy," doesn't mean it's hostile. Still a very collegial, friendly place to work. Yes, no one is there to hold your hand, but presumably that's a reason why many choose K&E in the first place.At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Empiricism died a long time ago. I suspect you can figure out how I know what I've mentioned (even though you aren't me).rayiner wrote:Man, it's amazing how you know that considering you haven't worked anywhere as an associate yet.quakeroats wrote:You're in for quite a surprise next fall.Anonymous User wrote:Don't know why there's so much anti-Kirkland trolling going on in this forum, particularly based on vague, second-hand information. I worked as an SA at Kirkland NY this summer and everyone was extremely friendly and collegial. I went out for meals and drinks with associates and partners almost every day of the week, and our summer class became incredibly tight (we still do events, even though the program is over). The free-market system inevitably attracts very outgoing, personable people. If someone isn't friendly, people won't want to work with them.Anonymous User wrote:Visited both. HH has a MUCH warmer and more welcoming environment. Probably the friedliest i've seen at the big firms I visited. If that is the most important factor to you, then id say go HH. At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment, since that just isn't their style. I appreiated their honesty, but it scared me off a bit.
But Kirkland would give you insanely good litigation experience so that certainly weighs into the equation. Not that HH wouldn't, but Kirkland is really known for it. It just seems like the lifestyle at Kirkland wouldn't be as sustainable as it would be at HH.
My advice is not to buy into the "someone told me" stories -- go visit the place yourself or contact alumni from your school. If you decide to go un-anonymous, I'll happily PM you with you own experience.
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
It has that reputation.Anonymous User wrote:It isn't toxic at all. You're being a little dramatic.quakeroats wrote:People choose K&E because it has a high Vault ranking. In general, there's no reason to pick K&E in New York. If you make it in, you'll make it into firms that don't have such a toxic environment for associates.Anonymous User wrote:Just because it isn't "feel-good fuzzy," doesn't mean it's hostile. Still a very collegial, friendly place to work. Yes, no one is there to hold your hand, but presumably that's a reason why many choose K&E in the first place.At Kirkland, multiple people went out of their way to tell me that they most certainly do not have a feel-good fuzzy environment
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
All comes down to fit. One's "toxic" environment, is another's "great" environment. Probably best not to try to sound objective about these things. I won't pretend that K&E is the place for everyone, but there are many who seek its environment for reasons aside from Vault ranking, and it's those people who tend to thrive at the firm.quakeroats wrote: It has that reputation.
- MrKappus
- Posts: 1685
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
quakeroats wrote:People choose K&E because it has a high Vault ranking. In general, there's no reason to pick K&E in New York. If you make it in, you'll make it into firms that don't have such a toxic environment for associates.
No.quakeroats wrote:It has that reputation.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
the fuck is your problem oats?
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Agreed. Also going to k&e chi for the same reasons. My sense is that the hours distribution at kirkland is especially right skewed (long tail to the right). The average is a bit higher (2200ish) as a result, but the median (2100ish) is totally doable. Sure, it's a bit more than peer firms in chi, but only by 50-100.Anonymous User wrote:the fuck is your problem oats?
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
1. I limited my comments to K&E NY.Anonymous User wrote:the fuck is your problem oats?
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
2. Callbacks are scripted affairs. I wouldn't put much, if any, stock in what is said or how the 5 most outgoing people they could find acted.
3. The OP has a very specific situation that K&E simply doesn't fit.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
re: #2 I spoke with other attorneys (non CB) and people from my school who summered there; their attitude was "You will work very hard, get along with everyone, and play very hard with your coworkers later"quakeroats wrote:1. I limited my comments to K&E NY.Anonymous User wrote:the fuck is your problem oats?
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
2. Callbacks are scripted affairs. I wouldn't put much, if any, stock in what is said or how the 5 most outgoing people they could find acted.
edit: it's just difficult to say it's "toxic" - CWT/White&Case are "toxic" - I can't imagine that K&E NY is any more toxic than Skadden/Weil.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- quakeroats
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Talk to junior associates. Many firms go to great pains to make summer experiences unlike actual work. As for Skadden/Weil, you might be right, but not in the way you think.Anonymous User wrote:re: #2 I spoke with other attorneys (non CB) and people from my school who summered there; their attitude was "You will work very hard, get along with everyone, and play very hard with your coworkers later"quakeroats wrote:1. I limited my comments to K&E NY.Anonymous User wrote:the fuck is your problem oats?
i chose k&e in chi because i had an excellent time during my cb and pointedly asked every associate about their w/l balance and their interactions with others.
everyone was extremely enthusiastic about the firm and i had a great time. the partners were friendly as well.
in fact, i don't think i had a single meeting during my cb that wasn't simply a very natural conversation between two people. the k&e trolling on atl is over the top but people here keep screeching about how awful it is to work there.
i had cbs with most of the v10 and a portion of the v25, as well as boutique firms, and i can tell you that my feel of k&e was extremely positive, especially in comparison to touted "nice" firms like cleary and dpw.
2. Callbacks are scripted affairs. I wouldn't put much, if any, stock in what is said or how the 5 most outgoing people they could find acted.
edit: it's just difficult to say it's "toxic" - CWT/White&Case are "toxic" - I can't imagine that K&E NY is any more toxic than Skadden/Weil.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
I don't think anyone pretends that a junior associate at any big law firm won't do at least some doc review, and anyone who goes into a big firm expecting not to do any needs a reality check. As someone who was a summer associate and is now an associate, I can tell you a couple differences:Many firms go to great pains to make summer experiences unlike actual work.
1) No more free lunches and dinners.
2) More hours.
3) More doc review.
4) No more summer events, though my firm has a lot of social events.
The atmosphere hasn't changed, however. People are just as friendly as when I was a summer, partners are just as respectful, and associates are just as collegial. While it's certainly possible for firms to paint a rosy picture on the callback, it's almost impossible for them to paint said picture during the summer associate program. You will inevitably encounter the disgruntled associates and find out about the dark side of the firm. Happy to say that I didn't find one aside from the usual universal biglaw complaints, and that my experience hasn't really differed from a cultural perspective.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
Is it safe to assume you're a Kirkland associate?Anonymous User wrote:I don't think anyone pretends that a junior associate at any big law firm won't do at least some doc review, and anyone who goes into a big firm expecting not to do any needs a reality check. As someone who was a summer associate and is now an associate, I can tell you a couple differences:Many firms go to great pains to make summer experiences unlike actual work.
1) No more free lunches and dinners.
2) More hours.
3) More doc review.
4) No more summer events, though my firm has a lot of social events.
The atmosphere hasn't changed, however. People are just as friendly as when I was a summer, partners are just as respectful, and associates are just as collegial. While it's certainly possible for firms to paint a rosy picture on the callback, it's almost impossible for them to paint said picture during the summer associate program. You will inevitably encounter the disgruntled associates and find out about the dark side of the firm. Happy to say that I didn't find one aside from the usual universal biglaw complaints, and that my experience hasn't really differed from a cultural perspective.
-
- Posts: 432542
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Kirkland vs. Hughes Hubbard
No. But I know enough who work in the New York office and have worked with enough of them to know that quakeroats is full of shit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it safe to assume you're a Kirkland associate?Anonymous User wrote:I don't think anyone pretends that a junior associate at any big law firm won't do at least some doc review, and anyone who goes into a big firm expecting not to do any needs a reality check. As someone who was a summer associate and is now an associate, I can tell you a couple differences:Many firms go to great pains to make summer experiences unlike actual work.
1) No more free lunches and dinners.
2) More hours.
3) More doc review.
4) No more summer events, though my firm has a lot of social events.
The atmosphere hasn't changed, however. People are just as friendly as when I was a summer, partners are just as respectful, and associates are just as collegial. While it's certainly possible for firms to paint a rosy picture on the callback, it's almost impossible for them to paint said picture during the summer associate program. You will inevitably encounter the disgruntled associates and find out about the dark side of the firm. Happy to say that I didn't find one aside from the usual universal biglaw complaints, and that my experience hasn't really differed from a cultural perspective.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login