Top Law Schools

I'm picking between Milbank and Shearman. Before I was leaning Shearman because they are known for their international presence, and because they have an office in San Francisco where I grew up.

Long term, I see myself going in-house, preferably at a tech company. After looking at Chambers and Partners rankings, I'm thinking Milbank might be the better choice? Shearman doesn't have any thing in Band 1 or Band 2. Milbank has Banking & Finance in Band 1.

What sort of factors should I be considering?

Anonymous User wrote:I'm picking between Milbank and Shearman. Before I was leaning Shearman because they are known for their international presence, and because they have an office in San Francisco where I grew up.

Long term, I see myself going in-house, preferably at a tech company. After looking at Chambers and Partners rankings, I'm thinking Milbank might be the better choice? Shearman doesn't have any thing in Band 1 or Band 2. Milbank has Banking & Finance in Band 1.

What sort of factors should I be considering?

I know people at both firms, and my sense is that the people at Shearman are much happier with their exit opportunities. A very small sample size admittedly, but whereas both of my two friends at Shearman ended up with awesome jobs I never thought you could get outside of the V10 (one in-house at a great Fortune500, another at the UN), the person at Milbank is at an OK midlaw shop.

Not to say both aren't great firms, because they are.

Please don't make your decision because Milbank has a higher band for banking lol. Vault is a meaningless prestige assessment. And if you really are concerned about prestige, just ask anyone which has more and they'll tell you Shearman is the obvious answer.

"Shearman doesn't have any thing in Band 1 or Band 2. "

False.

http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Lati ... ial/254312 - Lat Am Projects, Band 1

http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/Editorial/98488 Band 2 In US Nationwide Projects and Mining and Metals

http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Lati ... ial/254310 - Int'l Arbitration - Lat Am - Band 2

there are others, clearly you didn't look too thoroughly.

If you really do like international work, one factor you need to consider is how much weight the name carries abroad. Outside of the US, Asians and Latin Americans literally drool at the Shearman name.

And you seriously need to research Chambers closer. Here are just some of Shearman's Band 1 placements you missed:
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Glob ... 5#org_3654
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Glob ... 4#org_3654
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Glob ... 6#org_3654
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Glob ... 0#org_3654
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/Glob ... 6#org_3654

Wow, Milbank's really not getting much love in this thread. Yes, Shearman is much more prestigious than its Vault rank suggests, but does that really matter at the end of the day? You have the choose the place that's the right fit for you and only you know where that is.

OP, pm me.

I don't have the links, but isn't Shearman undergoing some major changes to fight its slipping reputation? I think it's hard to tell what the perception will be in 2015. I'm sure they're both going to be prestigious, but it will be interesting to see if Shearman returns to its former glory or keeps sliding.

I'm at HYS, and apparently a law reviewer just committed to Shearman. Don't know exact reasoning, but I definitely think S&S has turned a corner.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm picking between Milbank and Shearman. Before I was leaning Shearman because they are known for their international presence, and because they have an office in San Francisco where I grew up.

Long term, I see myself going in-house, preferably at a tech company. After looking at Chambers and Partners rankings, I'm thinking Milbank might be the better choice? Shearman doesn't have any thing in Band 1 or Band 2. Milbank has Banking & Finance in Band 1.

What sort of factors should I be considering?

I decided between Shearman and Milbank last year. Happy to help.

Don't expect me to be unbiased though. I liked the work Shearman does enough to chose it over some V10s.

Anonymous User wrote:I don't have the links, but isn't Shearman undergoing some major changes to fight its slipping reputation? I think it's hard to tell what the perception will be in 2015. I'm sure they're both going to be prestigious, but it will be interesting to see if Shearman returns to its former glory or keeps sliding.

This year has been looking really good for Shearman. There was a rough patch, but just did some megadeals and arbitrations that brought in some serious cash. Everyone's betting on big bonuses.

Anonymous User wrote:I'm at HYS, and apparently a law reviewer just committed to Shearman. Don't know exact reasoning, but I definitely think S&S has turned a corner.

A law student chose a firm, and that's the basis for thinking that Shearman turned a corner?

Holy shit. By far one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever read here.

Edit: I realize I might have dumbed down the argument a little; the student who chose Shearman is also REALLY smart... and that's the basis for thinking Shearman turned a corner. Still a dumb line of reasoning, but I suppose a little better than the one above.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I don't have the links, but isn't Shearman undergoing some major changes to fight its slipping reputation? I think it's hard to tell what the perception will be in 2015. I'm sure they're both going to be prestigious, but it will be interesting to see if Shearman returns to its former glory or keeps sliding.

This year has been looking really good for Shearman. There was a rough patch, but just did some megadeals and arbitrations that brought in some serious cash.0Everyone's betting on big bonuses.

And they will lose, since Shearman will follow the market set by Cravath.

Anonymous User wrote:I don't have the links, but isn't Shearman undergoing some major changes to fight its slipping reputation? I think it's hard to tell what the perception will be in 2015. I'm sure they're both going to be prestigious, but it will be interesting to see if Shearman returns to its former glory or keeps sliding.

For Shearman to return to its former glory, it would have to either enter the ranks as an amazing litigation boutique or break back in to the elite circle of M&A law firms. A lot of shit has changed since Shearman was booted out, and, believe me, it's extremely difficult to break back in. That's not to say that it isn't a good M&A practice, but it is to say that it is decidedly no longer among the top ranks of firms that do M&A and there is probably no coming back.

LOL at Fresh Prince thinking the whole world is M&A or litigation. Shearman is still one of the very top firms for project finance, international capital markets, arbitration, etc. In some specialties, they actually are THE best.

Wow. This thread is a page long and I don't think anyone has actually compared Milbank to Shearman yet.

Anonymous User wrote:LOL at Fresh Prince thinking the whole world is M&A or litigation. Shearman is still one of the very top firms for project finance, international capital markets, arbitration, etc. In some specialties, they actually are THE best.

I think Fresh Prince is aware of that, but even if you focus on those things, Shearman's success isn't assured. I had a Shearman partner encourage me to look into international arbitration. It's obviously a growing area and Shearman is amazing at it in certain arbitration centers. After talking with more people, what I realized was that as competition for that type of work heats up you will see (and can already see) other firms, particularly ones that are strong in litigation, make efforts to eat Shearman's lunch. I don't know if Shearman can remain as dominant in that area.

Project finance I know less about (and I don't know enough about transnational litigation/arbitration) but it has been my impression that the work has died down. More importantly, even if you're a leader in the field it isn't going to be as massively profitable as the highest end M&A or litigation work. I think Shearman's really interesting—prognosticating its success or demise strikes me as foolish for now.

No firm is assured success, but Shearman has a massive head start in arbitration. Also, Shearman is really regaining steam in M&A and laying the groundwork for growth in litigation. My career advisor actually singled them out as a firm that could see substantial ranking increases in the next couple years.

Can anyone talk about Milbank?

Anonymous User wrote:LOL at Fresh Prince thinking the whole world is M&A or litigation. Shearman is still one of the very top firms for project finance, international capital markets, arbitration, etc. In some specialties, they actually are THE best.

I'm sure they are the best in those areas, but those areas aren't practices that thrust firms into the upper echelon. And FYI, it's because of its once elite M&A practice that it was in that upper echelon to begin with.

Littler is a top employment law firm, but no one regards them as an elite firm. It really doesn't do Shearman service or add credibility that it's on the assent when you cite that Shearman is dominant in less mainstream areas.

FYI I had an offer at Shearman a few years ago. They were selling me on the same shtick. Even promised that I'd start on time. None of those turned out to be true, and I'm glad my intuition was correct when I turned that offer down.

I worked at Shearman until recently and I loved it. Originally, I lateraled to Shearman from a similar firm and I absolutely would encourage anyone with an offer to take a very close look. Biglaw work is biglaw work, but the people at Shearman really set it apart from its peers. Not just nice, but everyone has unique backgrounds and global ties (you'd be surprised how often the connections I made are helping me at my new job).

OP here. Really my biggest factor is exit options, and this is hard to get a lot of info about. Like I said, I'd like to end up in northern California. I'm interested in transactional work, so I'll probably go in-house. Not sure how to find any info about this to compare the two firms. Any advice would be appreciated.

Re: Bands. The way I understand band ratings is that they are based on the deals and clients that individual partners can pull. They aren't Vault rankings, as far as I know. They are Chambers ratings. And I'm looking at this with going in-house in mind, so I want exposure to the most interesting clients and deals. So I'm using the Nationwide and NYC Band ratings when comparing firms. Yes, Shearman has Band 1 in Japanese M&A deals and French Dispute Resolution. But this seems to me pretty irrelevant. I'm trying to be more practical. Basically I don't see how the deals a partner in Tokyo is doing is going to help me in NYC find a job when I don't make the partner track.

Exit op is probably the same.