Top Law Schools

Both NY. I want general commercial litigation.
Which one will make me more marketable for partnership, lateraling, etc. ?
I feel like Kirkland is bigger and more prestigious overall as of now, but i can see Quinn Emanuel rising further down the line (not to mention how far they have come from just four years ago).
also, are either known to no-offer or stealth?

which one should I take?

Anonymous User wrote:Both NY. I want general commercial litigation.
Which one will make me more marketable for partnership, lateraling, etc. ?
I feel like Kirkland is bigger and more prestigious overall as of now, but i can see Quinn Emanuel rising further down the line (not to mention how far they have come from just four years ago).

which one should I take?

Visit both again. You'll know after that.

Excellent in litigation, compensation, and long hours are shared attributes.

This is a "play by feel" choice; I know people at both and they all say the same things, so the environment will not be too different. Figure out which one you liked better at the CB

Quinn NY does a lot of plaintiff's side financial/securites litigation, FWIW. Both are outstanding at general commercial litigation and good at a lot of other stuff. If you have a strong desire to do soft IP or plaintiff's-side securities class actions I would pick Quinn, but TBH your decision should really come down to fit.

smittytron3k wrote:Quinn NY does a lot of plaintiff's side financial/securites litigation, FWIW. Both are outstanding at general commercial litigation and good at a lot of other stuff. If you have a strong desire to do soft IP or plaintiff's-side securities class actions I would pick Quinn, but TBH your decision should really come down to fit.

K&E has arguably the best copyright/trademark lawyer in America. Why would OP want to go to Quinn for soft IP???

OP here.
I should have clarified want to do more business/financial-related litigation (whether plaintiff or defendant, I don't really know yet).
It seems as though everyone thinks K&E and Q&E are pretty much peers and very similar. Is there anything else, besides fit, I should be looking out for?

Anonymous User wrote:OP here.
I should have clarified want to do more business/financial-related litigation (whether plaintiff or defendant, I don't really know yet).
It seems as though everyone thinks K&E and Q&E are pretty much peers and very similar. Is there anything else, besides fit, I should be looking out for?

"As of May 2011, our partners have tried 624 jury cases to verdict, winning 555 or 88.9%. They have also won 409 out of 434 bench trials, and 258 out of 281 arbitrations. The combined record for all trials and arbitrations is 1222 wins out of 1339 or 91.3%. When representing plaintiffs, our lawyers have won over $15 billion in judgments and settlements.
Perhaps the best evidence of our reputation for delivering results is our recent engagements. Morgan Stanley, for example, retained us to retry the $1.6 billion Perelman case in Florida, if it is ever retried. That is an example of a very sophisticated company, engaging our firm to defend it in its biggest case, in a jurisdiction where we do not even have an office. We were retained by Motorola to do the retrial of a trade secrets case against Willy Gary, a well-known plaintiffs' lawyer. We represented Seiko Epson in one of the largest patent infringement cases ever filed with the International Trade Commission, and after a trial obtained a complete plaintiff’s victory and a broad exclusion order. We obtained a jury verdict on behalf of Occidental Petroleum and secured a nine-figure settlement before the damages phase of the trial. We obtained a $75 million arbitration award on behalf of limited partners of a hedge fund. One of our young partners regularly represents AIG in the high-profile AIG/Maurice Greenberg battles. In almost every one of these cases we had to compete against the largest and best firms in the United States. "

--LinkRemoved--

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here.
I should have clarified want to do more business/financial-related litigation (whether plaintiff or defendant, I don't really know yet).
It seems as though everyone thinks K&E and Q&E are pretty much peers and very similar. Is there anything else, besides fit, I should be looking out for?

"As of May 2011, our partners have tried 624 jury cases to verdict, winning 555 or 88.9%. They have also won 409 out of 434 bench trials, and 258 out of 281 arbitrations. The combined record for all trials and arbitrations is 1222 wins out of 1339 or 91.3%. When representing plaintiffs, our lawyers have won over $15 billion in judgments and settlements.
Perhaps the best evidence of our reputation for delivering results is our recent engagements. Morgan Stanley, for example, retained us to retry the $1.6 billion Perelman case in Florida, if it is ever retried. That is an example of a very sophisticated company, engaging our firm to defend it in its biggest case, in a jurisdiction where we do not even have an office. We were retained by Motorola to do the retrial of a trade secrets case against Willy Gary, a well-known plaintiffs' lawyer. We represented Seiko Epson in one of the largest patent infringement cases ever filed with the International Trade Commission, and after a trial obtained a complete plaintiff’s victory and a broad exclusion order. We obtained a jury verdict on behalf of Occidental Petroleum and secured a nine-figure settlement before the damages phase of the trial. We obtained a $75 million arbitration award on behalf of limited partners of a hedge fund. One of our young partners regularly represents AIG in the high-profile AIG/Maurice Greenberg battles. In almost every one of these cases we had to compete against the largest and best firms in the United States. "

--LinkRemoved--

You realize that they're counting among their victories the victories their lawyers secured before joining Quinn, right?

Quinn is better than Kirkland. Kirkland has the bigger name.

I will tell you that Quinn is still on the fast-growth path upwards. There is a lot more opportunity at that place in general. Quinn has a pretty unique growth model that could only be replicated by a place like Susman or Bartlitt Beck right now. They are visionary in the sense that they are not risk averse and have a lot of faith in their associates. You will work a ton. Their lawyers are uber-devoted and the place sometimes has a hip-cult feel, like Scientology, but in a legal way.

However, if you want the accolades of your classmates, and to work for a few years in an unpleasant big-named meritocracy before transferring out to a cush 100k in-house job or maybe V60 satellite, I would work at Kirkland.

Fresh Prince wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here.
I should have clarified want to do more business/financial-related litigation (whether plaintiff or defendant, I don't really know yet).
It seems as though everyone thinks K&E and Q&E are pretty much peers and very similar. Is there anything else, besides fit, I should be looking out for?

"As of May 2011, our partners have tried 624 jury cases to verdict, winning 555 or 88.9%. They have also won 409 out of 434 bench trials, and 258 out of 281 arbitrations. The combined record for all trials and arbitrations is 1222 wins out of 1339 or 91.3%. When representing plaintiffs, our lawyers have won over $15 billion in judgments and settlements.
Perhaps the best evidence of our reputation for delivering results is our recent engagements. Morgan Stanley, for example, retained us to retry the $1.6 billion Perelman case in Florida, if it is ever retried. That is an example of a very sophisticated company, engaging our firm to defend it in its biggest case, in a jurisdiction where we do not even have an office. We were retained by Motorola to do the retrial of a trade secrets case against Willy Gary, a well-known plaintiffs' lawyer. We represented Seiko Epson in one of the largest patent infringement cases ever filed with the International Trade Commission, and after a trial obtained a complete plaintiff’s victory and a broad exclusion order. We obtained a jury verdict on behalf of Occidental Petroleum and secured a nine-figure settlement before the damages phase of the trial. We obtained a $75 million arbitration award on behalf of limited partners of a hedge fund. One of our young partners regularly represents AIG in the high-profile AIG/Maurice Greenberg battles. In almost every one of these cases we had to compete against the largest and best firms in the United States. "

--LinkRemoved--

You realize that they're counting among their victories the victories their lawyers secured before joining Quinn, right?

I'm not the one who wrote it, but why should that matter? I would think that this is pretty indicative of quality attorneys. I don't think Quinn is just hiring random dudes who got lucky with good winning percentages.

and to work for a few years in an unpleasant big-named meritocracy before transferring out to a cush 100k in-house job or maybe V60 satellite, I would work at Kirkland.

1) The only firm I know of with associates more miserable than associates at Kirkland is Quinn. I would say Boies too, but their wildly amazing comp system sort of numbs the pain.

2) LOL if you think the exit options out of Quinn are superior or even different. Probably the same, though since K&E has more institutional clients, it's probably easier to lateral into a big blue-chip company.

3) You act as if choosing a brand is wrong. 99% of Quinn's partners lateraled into Quinn. They lateraled into Quinn because of that nice, big, second only to Wachtell PPP. Once that profit starts slipping, the partners will start leaving. That's all that holds them together. If that happened at K&E, partners would leave, but not as many sincen there's still some degree of institutional loyalty (though, arguably, it isn't as strong as the institutional loyalty at firms like S&C, DPW, Debevoise, etc., where superstar rainmakers are entirely content with making the same money as pure service partners in their class year).

I'm not the one who wrote it, but why should that matter? I would think that this is pretty indicative of quality attorneys. I don't think Quinn is just hiring random dudes who got lucky with good winning percentages.

I just think it's disingenuous for a firm to boast about the victories its lawyers achieved when they weren't with the firm. Aside from that, I highly doubt other top litigation firms don't boast similarly impressive trial records.

But if you're focused on winning/losing, John Quinn himself lost to an Orrick litigator in the Bratz trial. Not only that, he got a damages award against his own client. I guess that means Orrick>>>>Quinn??

Fresh Prince wrote:

and to work for a few years in an unpleasant big-named meritocracy before transferring out to a cush 100k in-house job or maybe V60 satellite, I would work at Kirkland.

2) LOL if you think the exit options out of Quinn are superior or even different. Probably the same, though since K&E has more institutional clients, it's probably easier to lateral into a big blue-chip company..

are you saying that its "LOL" to think that exit options are of Quinn "superior or even different" b/c KE and QE are equal in that regard, or or that KE is better in exit opportunity?

Anonymous User wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:

and to work for a few years in an unpleasant big-named meritocracy before transferring out to a cush 100k in-house job or maybe V60 satellite, I would work at Kirkland.

2) LOL if you think the exit options out of Quinn are superior or even different. Probably the same, though since K&E has more institutional clients, it's probably easier to lateral into a big blue-chip company..

are you saying that its "LOL" to think that exit options are of Quinn "superior or even different" b/c KE and QE are equal in that regard, or or that KE is better in exit opportunity?

I don't think either is "better." I just think that it really depends on the client base, since those are the places that will be relatively easier to exit into. K&E is to blue-chip companies as S&C is to Wall Street, so you'll have a ton of in-house options. Quinn also represents large companies, but doesn't have nearly as many such clients, since they also do a ton of plaintiff's work.

I liked the people much more at Kirkland Ellis.

MARKET SHATTERING BONUSES

How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

One Remains, the other Shatters

YourCaptain wrote:One Remains, the other Shatters

Also relevant: "A rapist among us.. Quinn Emanual"

Anonymous User wrote:How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

Quinn pays substantially more than the Cravath scale. I don't know what that is, but they also have a profit share option. I think this would mean they pay more.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

Quinn pays substantially more than the Cravath scale. I don't know what that is, but they also have a profit share option. I think this would mean they pay more.

I am only going by what I've read on this forum, but if is mostly true, then Kirkland doesn't appear to offer anything that you couldn't get at Quinn. The minute difference in prestige is insignificant to me personally (as would be a much bigger difference of prestige actually). Meanwhile, Quinn is hip, has no dress code, cultivates this insurgent/outsider image, and pays more (bigger bonii). How is this even a choice?

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

Quinn pays substantially more than the Cravath scale. I don't know what that is, but they also have a profit share option. I think this would mean they pay more.

I am only going by what I've read on this forum, but if is mostly true, then Kirkland doesn't appear to offer anything that you couldn't get at Quinn. The minute difference in prestige is insignificant to me personally (as would be a much bigger difference of prestige actually). Meanwhile, Quinn is hip, has no dress code, cultivates this insurgent/outsider image, and pays more (bigger bonii). How is this even a choice?

I could be completely wrong here, but isn't Quinn the one that ATL commenters are always mocking as being the worst place, a place where you just get worked to death. I'm like 90% sure there's an ongoing gag on that site about how much quinn sucks and how unhappy thier employees are.

If its someone else, I apologize.

Nicholasnickynic wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

Quinn pays substantially more than the Cravath scale. I don't know what that is, but they also have a profit share option. I think this would mean they pay more.

I am only going by what I've read on this forum, but if is mostly true, then Kirkland doesn't appear to offer anything that you couldn't get at Quinn. The minute difference in prestige is insignificant to me personally (as would be a much bigger difference of prestige actually). Meanwhile, Quinn is hip, has no dress code, cultivates this insurgent/outsider image, and pays more (bigger bonii). How is this even a choice?

I could be completely wrong here, but isn't Quinn the one that ATL commenters are always mocking as being the worst place, a place where you just get worked to death. I'm like 90% sure there's an ongoing gag on that site about how much quinn sucks and how unhappy thier employees are.

If its someone else, I apologize.

Pretty sure you're referring to Cadwalader.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:How do the bonuses differ? Does Kirkland pay more?

Quinn pays substantially more than the Cravath scale. I don't know what that is, but they also have a profit share option. I think this would mean they pay more.

I am only going by what I've read on this forum, but if is mostly true, then Kirkland doesn't appear to offer anything that you couldn't get at Quinn. The minute difference in prestige is insignificant to me personally (as would be a much bigger difference of prestige actually). Meanwhile, Quinn is hip, has no dress code, cultivates this insurgent/outsider image, and pays more (bigger bonii). How is this even a choice?

Fixed. Go to each firm and see which one feels right to you, or go by client base. I know wonderful people from both firms.

Anonymous User wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:
You realize that they're counting among their victories the victories their lawyers secured before joining Quinn, right?

I'm not the one who wrote it, but why should that matter? I would think that this is pretty indicative of quality attorneys. I don't think Quinn is just hiring random dudes who got lucky with good winning percentages.

It should matter because a large portion of those cases are criminal cases tried as AUSAs or ADAs where conviction rates are 90%+. So an 88.9% victory rate actually isn't that great, it's about average.