Top Law Schools

Any info on this? seems like a satellite office that does solely securities related work in both corporate and lit. have a cb, but not sure whether i should consider it a strong contender?

Anonymous User wrote:Any info on this? seems like a satellite office that does solely securities related work in both corporate and lit. have a cb, but not sure whether i should consider it a strong contender?

Jesus, kid, do your research. S&C LA has a killer M&A practice, among the best on the west coast. It's a satellite office but it is NOT solely securities work (I dont even think its majority securities) and they've made a partner in the last 3 years out of an associate in that office.

I think the common knowledge on TLS is that it has a strong M&A practice but really only because of several (or one) partners. I would focus on bigger LA practices (Gibson, Skadden, Latham, OMM) if you're considering LA.

Classic humblebrag thread

Anonymous User wrote:I think the common knowledge on TLS is that it has a strong M&A practice but really only because of several (or one) partners. I would focus on bigger LA practices (Gibson, Skadden, Latham, OMM) if you're considering LA.

I certainly wouldn't put Gibson or OMM's M&A practices in that group. The next buyside deal they do will be their first (slight exaggeration, but not much). I can see the logic of a Skadden or Latham though, since at least they have real M&A practices with a bigger roster.

shouldn't really go to S&C LA for lit, right?

Anonymous User wrote:shouldn't really go to S&C LA for lit, right?

They've got a very busy lit department and a few former SCOTUS clerks to boot (I assume they would have gone elsewhere if S&C LA didn't have a solid practice).

i'm interested in this office as well. my biggest concern is that the majority of their cases may be business and securities related given that most of S&C's biggest clients are financial institutions. afraid of getting pigeonholed doing that sort of work.

also, there is a difference between having a satellite "feel" and actually being a satellite office. anyone know of the culture there? are people overworked more so than other offices?

Has anyone heard of the Valeant deal? Jesus. Look it up.

The office generates their own work on the corporate side and is busy as all hell because the work they generate is the real deal. In this sense it's not a satellite office at all, but still the main trainings etc. are run out of the NY office.

It's a small office so culture is what you'd expect--small and mixed bag. Don't go here if you're afraid to work or take on responsibility early on. A few of the partners are spectacularly brilliant and as a whole they are all good.

Anonymous User wrote:Has anyone heard of the Valeant deal? Jesus. Look it up.

The office generates their own work on the corporate side and is busy as all hell because the work they generate is the real deal. In this sense it's not a satellite office at all, but still the main trainings etc. are run out of the NY office.

It's a small office so culture is what you'd expect--small and mixed bag. Don't come go here if you're afraid to work or take on responsibility early on. A few of the partners are spectacularly brilliant and as a whole they are all good.

FTFY. a little defensive are we? pretty sure OP was asking regarding concerns that can't be gleaned easily from merely googling S&C (e.g. whether there is opportunity to do more than simply securities/m&A lit)

Anonymous User wrote:
FTFY. a little defensive are we? pretty sure OP was asking regarding concerns that can't be gleaned easily from merely googling S&C (e.g. whether there is opportunity to do more than simply securities/m&A lit)

Cheeky but incorrect. I work for no firm and don't care where anyone goes, though it's clever of you to add in M&A to OP's initial question when he very clearly just mentioned securities.

OP asked a question which is very easily gleaned from google (what type of work they do) and that is exactly how I answered the question. Google is your friend.

Oh so you did answer op's question of whether one can get involved in work other than business/securities related lit without having it take up a majority of op's caseload. I'm so sorry. I completely missed that part

If it's so easily gleaned from google why don't you go ahead and answer it then. Oh, let me go ahead and simply google cases S&C LA was involved in, and I'm sure that'll do it.

Anonymous User wrote:Oh so you did answer op's question of whether one can get involved in work other than business/securities related lit without having it take up a majority of op's caseload. I'm so sorry. I completely missed that part

If it's so easily gleaned from google why don't you go ahead and answer it then. Oh, let me go ahead and simply google cases S&C LA was involved in, and I'm sure that'll do it.

Wow this is almost too bad to dignify with a response but I have a free minute and it's low hanging fruit so here we go:

Op: "Any info on this? seems like a satellite office that does solely securities related work in both corporate and lit. have a cb, but not sure whether i should consider it a strong contender?"

Question 1: "Any info on this?"
My response: provided info that falls under general "any info" category

Question 2: "seems like a satellite office that does solely securities related work in both corporate and lit"
My response: addressed how it is and isn't like a satellite office based on various conditions and capabilities as well as addressing whether it "does solely securities related work in both corporate and lit." by providing an example of a behemoth deal spearheaded by the office that is not purely securities based

Question 3: "not sure whether i should consider it a strong contender?"
My response: along with already stated data, provided info on work load to aid in such a consideration

I mean, you can continue to add qualifiers that simply didn't exist in OP's post such as "without having it take up a majority of op's caseload," but 1) such a practice is fallacious beyond belief and 2) I won't be here to read it or respond.

Enjoy.

And sorry to any and all for getting off topic.

Fin/

Sounds like they do good work in both corporate and lit. OP, I think it just depends on your other options. Obviously S&C LA is not in the same echelon as Gibson/Munger/Irell, but I highly doubt S&C has any bad offices considering how well run the firm is. I would take the CB and compare it with other offers to see what you like most.

S&C vs. Simpson? Interested in lit.

someone ITT, possibly an S&C LA associate, is very defensive about their firm. calm down bro.