Top Law Schools

is it crazy to pick a V40 over a V10? i don't know what i want to do, not even a little bit, and i would be picking for fit reasons--although, i really, really liked both firms. Both are headquartered in NYC and I will be working in the NYC office. How will that affect exit options, etc?

related question: how do you find out what exit options are for a given firm?

Anonymous User wrote:is it crazy to pick a V40 over a V10? i don't know what i want to do, not even a little bit, and i would be picking for fit reasons--although, i really, really liked both firms. Both are headquartered in NYC and I will be working in the NYC office. How will that affect exit options, etc?

related question: how do you find out what exit options are for a given firm?

When you find out, let me know!!!

It is hard to advise you without knowing more. First, LOL at V40. What's a V40? Were you worried that we would say it is okay to pick a V39 over a V10 but not a V49 over a V10? Anyway, without knowing which firms, intended practice group, etc, my advice would be to go to the V10 since you really liked both of them. It is not a situation in which you did not fit at all with the V10 and loved the V40 (LOL again) to death. But that's just MHO.

ETA: If the V10 is Latham, then I think picking the V40 is credited, same for Weil although to a lesser extent

It wouldn't be crazy in the slightest. The obsession with Vault rankings on this forum is dumbfounding. Preferences based on firm fit should weigh much more heavily. I shudder to think that people are accepting positions based on slight differences in these rankings instead of where they foresee themselves being happier.

OP said both are located/hardhearted in NYC. This is important because that's the ONLY time the vault rankings have some relevance - they are very NYC-centric, and by the time you get to V40 you're starting to see firms with a real (though not huge) difference in quality compared to firms in the V10.

Look up both firms on Chambers & Partners, see what is written about their practice area strengths and client list. Broadly speaking, exit options exist at firms who need midlevel lawyers from your firm (so generally equally or less "well regarded" in the practice area you are in), in government/public interest jobs (tricky to pin down), and in-house with clients of your firm. The last one is one of the only tangible "benefits" of more-prestigiousier firms, they often have more impressive clients who wind up employing a significant number of departing lawyers from the firm. Not all of them, and the clients aren't going to never hire anybody from other firms, but it's a real effect.

Sea Urchin Ceviche wrote:It wouldn't be crazy in the slightest. The obsession with Vault rankings on this forum is dumbfounding. Preferences based on firm fit should weigh much more heavily. I shudder to think that people are accepting positions based on slight differences in these rankings instead of where they foresee themselves being happier.

Generally I post things like this myself, but the vault rankings are the most relevant in New York. They're based on surveys of associates, and a plurality of associates are in NYC. Their perceptions of firm prestige actually do, in broad strokes, reflect firm stability/prestige/client list/exit options. So it's almost an accident that they "matter" somewhat in NYC, but you can't be nearly as dismissive of them in that scenario. Particularly when it's a sizeable gap - the difference between the V5 and V10 is still damn near negligible in NYC, but by the time you get to V40 you're starting to see firms that actually have tangible differences in quality compared to firms in the V10.

somewhatwayward wrote:If the V10 is Latham, then I think picking the V40 is credited, same for Weil although to a lesser extent

why different for latham and weil?

Anonymous User wrote:

somewhatwayward wrote:If the V10 is Latham, then I think picking the V40 is credited, same for Weil although to a lesser extent

why different for latham and weil?

Well maybe I spoke to soon wrt Weil but wrt Latham, I think it leads to a low quality of life to constantly be worried about job security. Latham no offered a decent number of people this year (some with ridiculous pretenses like grades despite the fact that Latham is not a super grade-selective firm) and, of course, laid off vast swaths of junior associates a couple years back. Some people say this makes them leaner and meaner and less likely to do it again. Maybe, maybe not. Of course, perhaps the V40 laid off a lot of people as well....although there aren't any V40s whose names are synonymous with laying people off.

Weil seems to me to be less stable than other V10s. I believe they were deferring people until recently (and may have deferred class of 2012? not sure) yet they went right back to hiring big classes. IMHO, it wouldn't be crazy to choose a conservative V40 over Weil if you are very risk averse....at least, a case could be made.

somewhatwayward wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

somewhatwayward wrote:If the V10 is Latham, then I think picking the V40 is credited, same for Weil although to a lesser extent

why different for latham and weil?

...

Weil seems to me to be less stable than other V10s. I believe they were deferring people until recently (and may have deferred class of 2012? not sure) yet they went right back to hiring big classes. IMHO, it wouldn't be crazy to choose a conservative V40 over Weil if you are very risk averse....at least, a case could be made.

didn't more than a few firms defer 2010? I also think 2010 was only that class deferred for Weil. Stability concerns aside, do you think Weil offers significantly greater exit options than most V40 (or comparable) firms?