chambers associate missing firms 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.
-
fatduck
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm
chambers associate missing firms
what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
-
LawIdiot86
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: chambers associate missing firms
Giving some of the firms you have discovered to be missing might be helpful? Wilson Elser, a non-NALP firm is there, so it isn't as narrow as NALP was or is. Maybe the firm's small? Or too generalist to trigger a category listing?fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
-
clintonius
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am
Re: chambers associate missing firms
You're thinking Chambers & Partners, the site that rates practice areas. Chambers Associate gives an overview of the firm to help prospective associates differentiate between places.LawIdiot86 wrote:Giving some of the firms you have discovered to be missing might be helpful? Wilson Elser, a non-NALP firm is there, so it isn't as narrow as NALP was or is. Maybe the firm's small? Or too generalist to trigger a category listing?fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
-
fatduck
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm
Re: chambers associate missing firms
sorry i thought i included that in the OP. i noticed covington was missing, which prompted this thread.LawIdiot86 wrote:Giving some of the firms you have discovered to be missing might be helpful? Wilson Elser, a non-NALP firm is there, so it isn't as narrow as NALP was or is. Maybe the firm's small? Or too generalist to trigger a category listing?fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
-
LawIdiot86
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm
Re: chambers associate missing firms
Ahh, my bad. I have the old 2010 edition of Chambers Associates that lists almost all of the major firms, including Covington. If anyone thinks such information could be useful, PM.clintonius wrote:You're thinking Chambers & Partners, the site that rates practice areas. Chambers Associate gives an overview of the firm to help prospective associates differentiate between places.LawIdiot86 wrote:Giving some of the firms you have discovered to be missing might be helpful? Wilson Elser, a non-NALP firm is there, so it isn't as narrow as NALP was or is. Maybe the firm's small? Or too generalist to trigger a category listing?fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
anon168
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: chambers associate missing firms
fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
Because you have to pay to play.
-
fatduck
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm
Re: chambers associate missing firms
ah. in that case, i respect their principled holdout.anon168 wrote:fatduck wrote:what are we to assume about firms who are conspicuously absent from chambers associate? something to hide?
Because you have to pay to play.
