Top Law Schools

I am facing this decision. I know I want to do corporate work, not sure what within that category. Enjoyed both of my callbacks as much as one could enjoy a callback. A little wary of both for different reasons:

Sullcrom: supposedly a terrible place to work filled with insufferable gunners

Cravath: worked to death more so than your average sweatshop, also beholden to personalities of individual partners.

Can I make a wrong decision here ? Anyone else faced this decision before and how did you decide?

You don't know what you want to do and you likely won't know after a 10 week summer. I would choose Cravath because of their rotation system if I were in your shoes.

--ImageRemoved--

Congrats on having great options - I think it really depends on how you feel about the rotation system. A good way to think about it is this - what if you decide you really like M&A? At S&C, you can go ahead and make that your practice, while at Cravath you'll have to rotate into cap markets, banking etc. But on the other hand, if you like the idea of being a corporate generalist, then Cravath will probably be more your style.

*Caveat - I'm only a 3L, but my friends considering these two firms pretty much weighed the decision like that. Based on my friends who summered there have told me, not really sure I can distinguish between their personalities/cultures at all.

I'm interested in hearing more replies to this question. Thanks in advance to anyone able to provide input.

Anonymous User wrote:Congrats on having great options - I think it really depends on how you feel about the rotation system. A good way to think about it is this - what if you decide you really like M&A? At S&C, you can go ahead and make that your practice, while at Cravath you'll have to rotate into cap markets, banking etc. But on the other hand, if you like the idea of being a corporate generalist, then Cravath will probably be more your style.

*Caveat - I'm only a 3L, but my friends considering these two firms pretty much weighed the decision like that. Based on my friends who summered there have told me, not really sure I can distinguish between their personalities/cultures at all.

There isn't much else to input. You have to weigh this and also whether you would like to work in Midtown or in the Financial District. If you are big on Brooklyn, getting to the Financial District would be a breeze and could be a factor weighing in favor of Sullcrom in this situation.

You're really just splitting hairs. Go with your gut and never look back. Choosing between firms is a process involving incomplete information.

You can pretty much remove your work/life balance view of Cravath from the equation because I can absolutely guarantee you will be working the same hours at S&C.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm interested in hearing more replies to this question. Thanks in advance to anyone able to provide input.

A few more differences between Sullcrom and Cravath:

(1) At Cravath, for corporate, you're working for one partner at a time. This could be a good thing (more mentoring, more accountability) but also a terrible thing. At Sullcrom, you're working for multiple partners at the same time and have more control over whom you work for, although it's not a total free-market like Kirkland.

(2) At Sullcrom, you're a "generalist" for the first two years in corporate. Meaning, you can do whatever you want, and then you choose a practice group after that. So it maintains some of the benefits of a rotation without its structure.

(3) Sullcrom has international offices and Cravath doesn't really.

I am a paralegal at Sullcrom and I can 100% say the culture here is not as bad as people say. It's a very respectful, collegial environment. The associates I work with are all very friendly, normal and not "insufferable gunners" (although I'm in litigation). The hours can be bad, depending on what you're doing, but that's going to be the case at any big law firm.

I don't know anything about Cravath, just wanted to throw in my two cents.

purpletiger wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'm interested in hearing more replies to this question. Thanks in advance to anyone able to provide input.

A few more differences between Sullcrom and Cravath:

(1) At Cravath, for corporate, you're working for one partner at a time. This could be a good thing (more mentoring, more accountability) but also a terrible thing. At Sullcrom, you're working for multiple partners at the same time and have more control over whom you work for, although it's not a total free-market like Kirkland.

(2) At Sullcrom, you're a "generalist" for the first two years in corporate. Meaning, you can do whatever you want, and then you choose a practice group after that. So it maintains some of the benefits of a rotation without its structure.

(3) Sullcrom has international offices and Cravath doesn't really.

Cravath corp people work for 4-5 partners at a time, not one.

Also, rotating to London at Cravath is very easy if you want it. No other international offices though.

.

Do a second visit with each, meet some folks over dinner or drinks, and ask whatever tough questions you want to ask. They'll pay for you to come down and everything I bet.

I had to make this choice last year, also for corporate, and came down solidly on S&C. I can't speak for everyone, but I really liked the idea of being allowed to start off as a generalist, but slot into my preferred practice area as soon I figured out what that was (probably M&A). No doubt that Cravath would train you just as effectively, but you may end up rotating even after you've decided where to settle down.

I can't claim to fully understand the culture after only one summer. I will say, though, that it never came up as a complaint among the associates I talked to. I'd be surprised if the firm-specific hyperbole is true, given how frank our conversations were.

MTC87 wrote:I had to make this choice last year, also for corporate, and came down solidly on S&C. I can't speak for everyone, but I really liked the idea of being allowed to start off as a generalist, but slot into my preferred practice area as soon I figured out what that was (probably M&A). No doubt that Cravath would train you just as effectively, but you may end up rotating even after you've decided where to settle down.

I can't claim to fully understand the culture after only one summer. I will say, though, that it never came up as a complaint among the associates I talked to. I'd be surprised if the firm-specific hyperbole is true, given how frank our conversations were.

Do you have a sense what a typical week for an associate at S&C is? 9am-10pm M-F with 1 full day on the weekend? This is what I have heard, but interested in an insider's view.

OP's not the first person to have this choice. Tons of people face this and similar choices every year, and threads are made because of them (both here and on other forums). I don't understand why, for such a presumably smart person, it does not behoove them to search and form their own opinion before asking (or, perhaps reading those threads would obviate the need to create another dumb thread, but I'm being sanguine here).

Fresh Prince wrote:OP's not the first person to have this choice. Tons of people face this and similar choices every year, and threads are made because of them (both here and on other forums). I don't understand why, for such a presumably smart person, it does not behoove them to search and form their own opinion before asking (or, perhaps reading those threads would obviate the need to create another dumb thread, but I'm being sanguine here).

OP here. Most of the threads you referred to were from 2011. Wihle only 2 years later, the legal market changes despite there being a presiding new normal. Some of the 2011 threads spoke to the relative decline of Cravath, whereas Sullcrom had consolidated its position during the downturn. I was hoping 2 years after those thoughts that maybe some different opinions would come out for whatever has transpired over the last 2 years.

TL,DR: I know how to use the search function. Came for less dated information.

Some of the 2011 threads spoke to the relative decline of Cravath, whereas Sullcrom had consolidated its position during the downturn. I was hoping 2 years after those thoughts that maybe some different opinions would come out for whatever has transpired over the last 2 years.

All of that is really abstract circle-jerking. If that really is happening, it wouldn't manifest itself in your experience within your career as an attorney (and almost certainly during your career at either firm). And that "problem" is something for the partnership of either firm to worry about. You're not deciding between Cravath and Howrey. You're deciding between two firms that will be top 5 law firms for the foreseeable future.

If your investigation really bears out that Cravath is in slight decline compared to SullCrom, and you base your decision on this, you really need some help. The advice in this thread, as it should be, is:

You're really just splitting hairs. Go with your gut and never look back. Choosing between firms is a process involving incomplete information.

This advice remains unchanged from prior years. And if it had changed, believe me, this forum would make a massive stink about it and you'd be well aware of it.

Do your follow-up visits. You don't need posters here to tell you about rotation systems versus more "free market." I am sure you were able to uncover these "little eccentricities" during the interview process. Just follow your gut and go with where you fit.

You can't go wrong here, go with your gut. To me, however, these are somewhat big differences:

1) Location: which do you prefer? If you want to live in Brooklyn, 100% chose S&C. If you work in midtown. you could theoretically meet a friend for lunch or go run an errand if not too busy, which is somewhat harder if you are stuck all the way down in FiDi.

2) Laterals: People lateral from Cravath to S&C. The reverse is not going to happen, as Cravath almost never takes laterals.

3) Rotation System: Cravath's system is very unique.

Last Question: Is it really true that CSM entails working a meaningful amount of extra hours when compared against S&C? Everyone plays up CSM as working more than other V5 firms but is this really so and, if it is, is the difference meaningful?

Is it really true that CSM entails working a meaningful amount of extra hours when compared against S&C?

No, it isn't.

Fresh Prince wrote:OP's not the first person to have this choice. Tons of people face this and similar choices every year, and threads are made because of them (both here and on other forums). I don't understand why, for such a presumably smart person, it does not behoove them to search and form their own opinion before asking (or, perhaps reading those threads would obviate the need to create another dumb thread, but I'm being sanguine here).

Hey fresh prince, you a lil insecure? You see a guy asking cravath v sull crom so you respond my pointing out OP isn't the first to have this decision to make - you jelly of OP? You wish you had this decision to make? You don't understand why it doesn't behoove OP to form his own opinion - wtf does that even mean? By making this thread, OP is trying to make his own opinion. If you don't agree with the manner by which OP is forming his/her opinion, gtfo of this thread and don't respond.

used outed for anon abuse

nucky thompson wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:OP's not the first person to have this choice. Tons of people face this and similar choices every year, and threads are made because of them (both here and on other forums). I don't understand why, for such a presumably smart person, it does not behoove them to search and form their own opinion before asking (or, perhaps reading those threads would obviate the need to create another dumb thread, but I'm being sanguine here).

Hey fresh prince, you a lil insecure? You see a guy asking cravath v sull crom so you respond my pointing out OP isn't the first to have this decision to make - you jelly of OP? You wish you had this decision to make? You don't understand why it doesn't behoove OP to form his own opinion - wtf does that even mean? By making this thread, OP is trying to make his own opinion. If you don't agree with the manner by which OP is forming his/her opinion, gtfo of this thread and don't respond.

used outed for anon abuse

Nicely done. Always amuses me when people call me insecure through an anonymous post.

Fresh Prince wrote:

nucky thompson wrote:

Fresh Prince wrote:OP's not the first person to have this choice. Tons of people face this and similar choices every year, and threads are made because of them (both here and on other forums). I don't understand why, for such a presumably smart person, it does not behoove them to search and form their own opinion before asking (or, perhaps reading those threads would obviate the need to create another dumb thread, but I'm being sanguine here).

Hey fresh prince, you a lil insecure? You see a guy asking cravath v sull crom so you respond my pointing out OP isn't the first to have this decision to make - you jelly of OP? You wish you had this decision to make? You don't understand why it doesn't behoove OP to form his own opinion - wtf does that even mean? By making this thread, OP is trying to make his own opinion. If you don't agree with the manner by which OP is forming his/her opinion, gtfo of this thread and don't respond.

used outed for anon abuse

Nicely done. Always amuses me when people call me insecure through an anonymous post.

clear instance of unintentional anon use. btw, whether my statement was posted by "anonymous user" or "nucky thompson" would be relevant only to an insecure person

Can we try to keep this on topic? I appreciate that this topic brings out the passion.