Top Law Schools

NYC and corporate practice interest. Thanks!

Anyone willing to share reasons? Looks like Debavoise is getting a lot of love.

Just FYI, it is spelled Debevoise. It would probably be best if you spelled it correctly when you correspond with them.

Noted. It was simply a typo. Not going to change though because the poll would reset.

Are people put off by Latham's "fratty" culture? Gibson's free market system? Or is Debevoise really the best corporate firm among these? For what it's worth, M&A, PE, and Banking/Finance all interest me to a certain extent.

Anonymous User wrote:Noted. It was simply a typo. Not going to change though because the poll would reset.

I only noted it because it was simply a typo that you made three times.

fair enough.

thelaststraw05 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Noted. It was simply a typo. Not going to change though because the poll would reset.

I only noted it because it was simply a typo that you made three times.

More to topic: Debevoise >>> Gibson for corporate, and firm is more stable than Latham.

Fresh Prince wrote:

thelaststraw05 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Noted. It was simply a typo. Not going to change though because the poll would reset.

I only noted it because it was simply a typo that you made three times.

More to topic: Debevoise >>> Gibson for corporate, and firm is more stable than Latham.

Setting aside conventional wisdom, I'm not sure I agree with the above (and I'm not sure why Deb gets so much love on these boards). Debevoise has a bit of a weird corporate practice (really much more on the fund formation side than the LBO PE side, and a miniscule (relatively) cap markets/banking practice). And while they were much less public about it, I do know a few folks who got axed there.

itbdvorm wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:

thelaststraw05 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Noted. It was simply a typo. Not going to change though because the poll would reset.

I only noted it because it was simply a typo that you made three times.

More to topic: Debevoise >>> Gibson for corporate, and firm is more stable than Latham.

Setting aside conventional wisdom, I'm not sure I agree with the above (and I'm not sure why Deb gets so much love on these boards). Debevoise has a bit of a weird corporate practice (really much more on the fund formation side than the LBO PE side, and a miniscule (relatively) cap markets/banking practice). And while they were much less public about it, I do know a few folks who got axed there.

Completely agreed, but I think GDC gets more love here for some reason. None of these firms are paragons of stability (though what firm is?), but I'd rather be at Debevoise than
Latham because of stability, and at Debevoise over GDC because I think their corporate practice is better, even if somewhat more niche.

itbdvorm: Who did you vote for and why? Was it based on prestige, quality of work, etc.? Thanks.

Fresh Prince: Why do you say Latham is unstable? Is it only because of their past? Their class sizes for the NY have been more conservative recently.

Anonymous User wrote:itbdvorm: Who did you vote for and why? Was it based on prestige, quality of work, etc.? Thanks.

Fresh Prince: Why do you say Latham is unstable? Is it only because of their past? Their class sizes for the NY have been more conservative recently.

I voted for Latham. I frankly think that they have the best NY corporate group of the three, and I think concerns about their stability are way overblown

Bump. For more votes / reasons for votes. Thanks!

Debevoise and Latham's corporate groups are probably a (noticeable, but not very large) step above Gibson's in New York. I don't really there's a difference in "strength" between Debevoise and Latham (also, they do very similar work in similar practice areas).

There's a fairly significant cultural difference between Latham and Debevoise - did you have a strong reaction one way or the other? Latham is traditionally more social / outgoing / entrepreneurial / competitive (though not as much as some places), whereas Debevoise is more familial, polite, conservative (culturally) and nurturing. I can say firsthand the latter stereotype is true, though I don't have any firsthand experience with Latham outside the interview process.

FWIW, in this situation two years ago (with a couple others in the mix as well), I took Debevoise.

Didn't Latham NY no-offer some summers this year?

Fresh Prince wrote: Completely agreed, but I think GDC gets more love here for some reason. None of these firms are paragons of stability (though what firm is?), but I'd rather be at Debevoise than
Latham because of stability, and at Debevoise over GDC because I think their corporate practice is better, even if somewhat more niche.

Hasn't Gibson had like 19 straight years of profit or something like that?

fish52 wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote: Completely agreed, but I think GDC gets more love here for some reason. None of these firms are paragons of stability (though what firm is?), but I'd rather be at Debevoise than
Latham because of stability, and at Debevoise over GDC because I think their corporate practice is better, even if somewhat more niche.

Hasn't Gibson had like 19 straight years of profit or something like that?

and no debt

Last bump.

snailio wrote:

fish52 wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote: Completely agreed, but I think GDC gets more love here for some reason. None of these firms are paragons of stability (though what firm is?), but I'd rather be at Debevoise than
Latham because of stability, and at Debevoise over GDC because I think their corporate practice is better, even if somewhat more niche.

Hasn't Gibson had like 19 straight years of profit or something like that?

and no debt

Huh? Every firm in this thread has had at least that many years of profit. You know why? Because their PPP is greater than $1.

And I hate this "no debt" BS. Just because WLRK has debt, does that mean they're less stable? Lots of firms carry debt (and I'm sure GDC does too; they're probably just characterizing it differently). You need debt to pay your salaries, to pay the lease, as well as a ton of other expenses. That's just how businesses work.

Anyways, above isn't meant to trash on GDC. It's just meant to say that pretty much every firm (except two or three) in the V100 had laid off lawyers. that's why none of the firms in this thread are paragons of stability.

Only one of these firms, Latham, is also a verb for first year associate layoffs. While other firms did lay off associates, Latham went after the first years, which is especially brutal.

ain't that the truth. That's why I picked Debevoise.

Fresh Prince wrote:

snailio wrote:

fish52 wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote: Completely agreed, but I think GDC gets more love here for some reason. None of these firms are paragons of stability (though what firm is?), but I'd rather be at Debevoise than
Latham because of stability, and at Debevoise over GDC because I think their corporate practice is better, even if somewhat more niche.

Hasn't Gibson had like 19 straight years of profit or something like that?

and no debt

Huh? Every firm in this thread has had at least that many years of profit. You know why? Because their PPP is greater than $1.

And I hate this "no debt" BS. Just because WLRK has debt, does that mean they're less stable? Lots of firms carry debt (and I'm sure GDC does too; they're probably just characterizing it differently). You need debt to pay your salaries, to pay the lease, as well as a ton of other expenses. That's just how businesses work.

Anyways, above isn't meant to trash on GDC. It's just meant to say that pretty much every firm (except two or three) in the V100 had laid off lawyers. that's why none of the firms in this thread are paragons of stability.

Maybe you just have a reading comprehension problem, Gibson has NO debt....How you run your business is up to you.

Maybe you just have a reading comprehension problem, Gibson has NO debt....How you run your business is up to you.

Maybe you're just retarded. Every firm has a revolving credit facility that they use. That's debt.

Maybe GDC doesn't have long term debt, which is fine. but a lot of peer and better firms don't have that kind of debt either...