Top Law Schools

For general litigation

I feel like this is 90% a question of free market vs. rotation. Do you really not have a preference?

Cravath's 18-24 mo lit rotations are intense: it's quite the crapshoot. Then again, if you like structure and don't want to have to go looking for your own work, maybe that appeals to you. Both seemed like they could offer strong mentorship if you took initiative. Each should appeal to different types of people. The quality of work and matters will be very high at each. I think Gibson being stronger in LA/DC versus Cravath being NY-centric might have some minor significance, but I couldn't tell you how much.

I'd do Gibson, but I can totally see it going the other way too based on personality.

ETA; its jbagelboy but I'd rather have it preserved as anon

Anonymous User wrote:I feel like this is 90% a question of free market vs. rotation. Do you really not have a preference?

Cravath's 18-24 mo lit rotations are intense: it's quite the crapshoot. Then again, if you like structure and don't want to have to go looking for your own work, maybe that appeals to you. Both seemed like they could offer strong mentorship if you took initiative. Each should appeal to different types of people. The quality of work and matters will be very high at each. I think Gibson being stronger in LA/DC versus Cravath being NY-centric might have some minor significance, but I couldn't tell you how much.

I'd do Gibson, but I can totally see it going the other way too based on personality.

ETA; its jbagelboy but I'd rather have it preserved as anon

I feel like it's not that easy to know whether free-market or fixed rotation is better without having done them. Firms sell their way of doing things as a positive differentiator, and I'm not sure I have a gut for which appeals to me.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I feel like this is 90% a question of free market vs. rotation. Do you really not have a preference?

Cravath's 18-24 mo lit rotations are intense: it's quite the crapshoot. Then again, if you like structure and don't want to have to go looking for your own work, maybe that appeals to you. Both seemed like they could offer strong mentorship if you took initiative. Each should appeal to different types of people. The quality of work and matters will be very high at each. I think Gibson being stronger in LA/DC versus Cravath being NY-centric might have some minor significance, but I couldn't tell you how much.

I'd do Gibson, but I can totally see it going the other way too based on personality.

ETA; its jbagelboy but I'd rather have it preserved as anon

I feel like it's not that easy to know whether free-market or fixed rotation is better without having done them. Firms sell their way of doing things as a positive differentiator, and I'm not sure I have a gut for which appeals to me.

Generally I agree, but these are arguably the most extreme examples of each type and they inform the firm culture. Did you like people you met at Gibson and you think you'd like to work with them? You'd actually have this choice and you'd be able to sell yourself on their cases. At Cravath you won't know who you're working under and you'll have little to no control over the cases you work and the type of assignment. If you don't like anyone in particular at Gibson and you just want a set of skills and aren't concerned with who or what you're working on, maybe Cravath is the better fit.