Top Law Schools

Out of curiosity, what firms would you guys take over Cravath, both in NYC and non-NYC, and why? Looking mostly at corporate but also interested in hearing from those more interested in lit.

Any of the other V5s? Top firms in other markets (DC, LA/SF/SV)?

Wachtell and none others unless you wanted capital markets then I'd take DPW or if you wanted PE i think STB/KE

Some top boutiques in Chi and NY.

nsideirish wrote:Some top boutiques in Chi and NY.

What corporate boutiques?

Cravath focuses on major bread and butter deals in corporate: capital markets, finance, M&A, etc. There are entire areas of corporate practices (financial institutions, derivatives, hedge funds/PE, VC work, etc.) that other "good" firms do but Cravath doesn't touch, so if for whatever reason you know you want to be a hedge fund lawyer... maybe don't go to Cravath?

Also, the rotation system is very bold - if you would rather become an expert/specialist in X, then there are firms that will be better suited for that.

In terms of reputation, there are 5 to 10 NYC firms every bit as good as Cravath - everybody knows them, and there's no sense arguing over exactly where to draw the line. If you have offers at those firms, soft things like fit/culture or hard things like exactly what practice/assignment system you want matter MUCH more than the names and ampersands on your business card.

I think there are a number of litigation-focused firms that I would take over Cravath, but then again, lit isn't Cravath's bread and butter, so that's not a knock against them.

if I was only interested in new york, probably davis polk, cleary, boies schiller (for lit), wachtell based on fit and presence (and pay), but cravath remains pretty high on the list. If nationwide, then a lot of firms - gibson, williams & connolly, munger, irell, ect. A few would be equal, like sullivan & cromwell.

then again, I'm not a huge fan of the 18mo rotations

jbagelboy wrote:if I was only interested in new york, probably davis polk, cleary, boies schiller (for lit), wachtell based on fit and presence (and pay), but cravath remains pretty high on the list. If nationwide, then a lot of firms - gibson, williams & connolly, munger, irell, ect. A few would be equal, like sullivan & cromwell.

then again, I'm not a huge fan of the 18mo rotations

I'm making the same choice as the OP, though I'm also looking at California firms. Corporate.

I know I want to work in the Bay Area long term. Cravath's great if I want to switch to another firm down the road, but it's also very tempting to start directly in that area. For that reason, I'm looking at Wilson Sonsini and Davis Polk's Menlo Park office, and I would consider Cooley but I didn't get the callback (none are clearly above Cravath but at least in the running). I'd also put Fenwick in there but they didn't come to my school's OCI program.

If I were to stay in New York, I think the only two firms I might possibly take over Cravath (outside Wachtell) would be Davis and Cleary. Neither'd be superior to Cravath in terms of work, but it'd certainly be more than good enough and it'd involve prioritizing the people there above Cravath's. I didn't dislike Cravath's people at all - I liked the partners I met, and liked the associates even more. But there's an entirely different vibe/atmosphere at Cleary, and Cravath will always have this formal undertone in the back. If you wanted financial regulatory work or perhaps tax, Davis and Cleary gain a little more traction on Cravath, too. It's close enough with SullCrom that that's your own choice (but I'm leaning Cravath over it or Simpson).

If I wanted litigation (and I don't), the options open up much more - I think there're a lot I'd take over Cravath. Jenner, for starters, or even Paul Weiss. Boies Schiller, certainly. The thought of rotating through one partner at a time in litigation versus the five in corporate sounds terrifying, because if it's bad it's gonna be really bad because you can't work with anyone else.

Anonymous User wrote:

jbagelboy wrote:if I was only interested in new york, probably davis polk, cleary, boies schiller (for lit), wachtell based on fit and presence (and pay), but cravath remains pretty high on the list. If nationwide, then a lot of firms - gibson, williams & connolly, munger, irell, ect. A few would be equal, like sullivan & cromwell.

then again, I'm not a huge fan of the 18mo rotations

I'm making the same choice as the OP, though I'm also looking at California firms. Corporate.

I know I want to work in the Bay Area long term. Cravath's great if I want to switch to another firm down the road, but it's also very tempting to start directly in that area. For that reason, I'm looking at Wilson Sonsini and Davis Polk's Menlo Park office, and I would consider Cooley but I didn't get the callback (none are clearly above Cravath but at least in the running). I'd also put Fenwick in there but they didn't come to my school's OCI program.

If I were to stay in New York, I think the only two firms I might possibly take over Cravath (outside Wachtell) would be Davis and Cleary. Neither'd be superior to Cravath in terms of work, but it'd certainly be more than good enough and it'd involve prioritizing the people there above Cravath's. I didn't dislike Cravath's people at all - I liked the partners I met, and liked the associates even more. But there's an entirely different vibe/atmosphere at Cleary, and Cravath will always have this formal undertone in the back. If you wanted financial regulatory work or perhaps tax, Davis and Cleary gain a little more traction on Cravath, too. It's close enough with SullCrom that that's your own choice (but I'm leaning Cravath over it or Simpson).

If I wanted litigation (and I don't), the options open up much more - I think there're a lot I'd take over Cravath. Jenner, for starters, or even Paul Weiss. Boies Schiller, certainly. The thought of rotating through one partner at a time in litigation versus the five in corporate sounds terrifying, because if it's bad it's gonna be really bad because you can't work with anyone else.

lol, I'm pretty sure I know who you are based on this post. Unfortunately it probably means you know who I am too.

don't really understand why you would want to know about "top firms in other markets"...IMO you should really decide where you'd like to practice instead of letting marginal differences in prestige/quality of work dictate your decision

but yeah, if you're interested in lit there are dozens of firms/boutiques you should take over Cravath outside of NYC: MTO, KVN, GDC, W&C, etc. etc.

of course, some of those firms are way more selective than Cravath...

OP here. I was curious about how others would approach this because I have offers from a few firms outside of NYC and am contemplating whether it would be worth it to start my career in those markets vs. lateraling after.

For bankruptcy, K&E, Weil, Skadden, Jones Day

I don't even understand the premise of this question. How much Vault whoring do you need to have internalized to ask it?

If you want to do bank regulatory work, you don't want Cravath. If you want to do public securities work, you don't want Cravath. If you want to do PE, you don't want Cravath. If you want to do FIG m&a, you don't want Cravath. If you want to do project finance, you don't want Cravath. If you don't want to work at a firm where partners have private suites guarded by their secretaries, you don't want Cravath.

Not sure why this is even a question.

Disclaimer: S&C summer

jbagelboy wrote:lol, I'm pretty sure I know who you are based on this post. Unfortunately it probably means you know who I am too.

Think so haha. No sweat! And good luck this week!

To the last poster, doesn't Cravath do a good amount of public securities work? I thought that was one of their bread & butter things, even. Please do correct me, I'd like to know that.

Anonymous User wrote:if you're interested in lit there are dozens of firms/boutiques you should take over Cravath

TCR. Literally dozens of firms are better for litigation than Cravath. To name only a few: Boies, Susman, Keker, Munger, Irell, Quinn, GDC, W&C, Covington, Skadden, SullCrom, the list goes on days, both in the city and elsewhere.

gross, why would you ever want to work at Cravath?

ResIpsa21 wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:if you're interested in lit there are dozens of firms/boutiques you should take over Cravath

TCR. Literally dozens of firms are better for litigation than Cravath. To name only a few: Boies, Susman, Keker, Munger, Irell, Quinn, GDC, W&C, Covington, Skadden, SullCrom, the list goes on days, both in the city and elsewhere.

Out of Chicago:

Barack, Bartlit, Novack, etc.

I would never accept an offer at Cravath. I would rather do DUI defense.

Agreed!!

Why are people so into Cravath? It sounds like the worst.

Any lifestyle firm, if such a thing exists.

Anonymous User wrote:Agreed!!

Why are people so into Cravath? It sounds like the worst.

I forget where I read it, but somebody once said Cravath is a place for people who love the law and hate everyone, and everything, else.

I almost worked there. If you want to be intense about lawying it's a good place to go to be intense about lawying.

As of mid-June 13 Cravath first years had already quit, and plenty of people there, including one who posts regularly here, have averaged upwards of 300 billables a month this year.

So I guess the answer is quite a few.

I chose a lower ranked firm over Cravath and I liked Cravath's people and work. It's just obvious that the hours are on another level.

Poof

I mean, I really don't think Cravath is materially worse in terms of hours/intensity than any other "top" firm in a major city. It's possible it's more uniform than some others (i.e. literally everyone is overwhelmed instead of just most people?) but even that I'm skeptical of.

Otherwise it's a great firm and does great work, and the people don't seem horrible. It's just intense. I literally almost worked there - I was choosing between CSM and one other place, and agonized for a long time.

I also agonized for a while, and I'm pretty sure I chose a firm ranked well below TSL's. What's tough with Cravath is the rotation system; unlike a lot of other firms where the work is spread around somewhat evenly, the work at Cravath can be atrocious for one person and not so bad for another. I imagine the first years that peaced out so quickly rolled sevens in the game of rotation system craps. Or something like that.

But it's clearly a great firm for corporate work and you wouldn't be wrong to take it and hold on for dear life. I happen to be fairly lazy and the thought of working real hours during the summer might have sadly been the straw that broke the camel's back.