Phil Brooks wrote: gk101 wrote:
Lacepiece23 wrote:Everyone in this thread seems to have a corporate bias. What about Lit? I turned down some prestige for a better work/life balanace and more substantive work in another market. I always understood why it was important for corp associates to go to top firms, but never really understood the draw for litigation folks.
Vault rankings in general have a corporate bias. With litigation, the work and fit within the practice group is far more important than the rankings. The same may be true in practice for corporate as well (fit + work>>>>> vault ranking) but I get the impression that vault rankings are an acceptable proxy for picking "elite" firms. Prestige whoring based on vault rankings in litigation is objectively dumb
Asked and answered. Thank you.
One final thing: is "prestige whoring based on vault rankings in litigation objectively dumb" because the allegedly primary advantage of highly ranked firms--exit options--does not apply to litigation? I.e. Litigators are screwed for exit options regardless of the rank of the firm?
Doing so is "objectively stupid" because, as rough a proxy as vault is for firm quality when it comes to transactional work from an associate's perspective, it's even worse of a proxy for firm quality when it comes to litigation. Williams & Connolly, Debevoise, Gibson Dunn, Quinn, Irell, any of the unranked lit boutiques, etc., are, at least in my mind, superior to any of the V5's litigation practices. And, some firms might not even do the particular kind of litigation you're interested in.
Also, on a bit of a tangent... please, please don't think firms are actually fungible or that you should merely try to go to the "best" firms. There are very real differences between the firms. For example, there was the above the law story in which Ropes & Gray associates were all given computers and phones and whatnot to make it easier to work from home, which is a far cry from Quinn, which, the last I heard, did not (always? sometimes?) give laptops to first-year associates because they prefer the first years to work in the office. Which firm is better depends on your situation and personality. If you have a family and would like to be able to go home at 5:30, have dinner with them, and then work from a home office, well, good luck doing that without a firm-issued laptop. If you're single and want to dive in to work and and really be engrossed with what you do, then maybe having you and all of your friends working in the office at the same time would be fun.
Is it hard as a 2L to figure out these real differences when you're interviewing? Absolutely. But that difficulty doesn't mean you should give up and pretend the firms are all the same. They're not, even if it can be hard for you to tell at this point.