Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Assuming offers at both coming off clerkships, what are the factors leaning towards one over the other? (For litigation, NY)
- Lacepiece23
- Posts: 1434
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:10 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
- fats provolone
- Posts: 7125
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 4:44 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
oh s&c selects for personality alright
- utahraptor
- Posts: 3439
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:05 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
in terms of people, both have total weirdos and both have amazing people, at least in terms of the students they attractAnonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
I don't think TLS is going to be able to help you with something like that
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Because it makes no sense to be more selective at screener than callback.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
I have to say, I don't get this "screening for personality" idea at all. I don't think it can actually be done, especially in a 20-30 minute interview with stock questions and stock responses. You bet that I tried to affect, whatever that means, a "fratty" demeanor for Latham, Kirkland, etc. But it's really hard to show how fratty you are when answering questions about my 1L summer. Law students will do what it takes to get a job.
Even if one could determine an interviewee's personality in a short interview, how do we know that affected personality is actually the interviewee's actual personality?
Even if one could determine an interviewee's personality in a short interview, how do we know that affected personality is actually the interviewee's actual personality?
- fats provolone
- Posts: 7125
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 4:44 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
u figure it out over the summer and cold offer themAnonymous User wrote:I have to say, I don't get this "screening for personality" idea at all. I don't think it can actually be done, especially in a 20-30 minute interview with stock questions and stock responses. You bet that I tried to affect, whatever that means, a "fratty" demeanor for Latham, Kirkland, etc. But it's really hard to show how fratty you are when answering questions about my 1L summer. Law students will do what it takes to get a job.
Even if one could determine an interviewee's personality in a short interview, how do we know that affected personality is actually the interviewee's actual personality?
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
S&C is more preftigious
PW seems to have substantially fewer assholes
Downtown versus midtown
I would be shocked if anyone could point to a concrete categorical advantage to going to SullCrom for lit.
PW seems to have substantially fewer assholes
Downtown versus midtown
I would be shocked if anyone could point to a concrete categorical advantage to going to SullCrom for lit.
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Those $400 flights and $300 hotels cut into PPPs though bro gotta cut backDesert Fox wrote:Because it makes no sense to be more selective at screener than callback.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
So why even call back.2014 wrote:Those $400 flights and $300 hotels cut into PPPs though bro gotta cut backDesert Fox wrote:Because it makes no sense to be more selective at screener than callback.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3311
- Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
(outed as S&C aspie)Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
- sayan
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:05 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
At least at HLS in my year (and the year before), every single person who received a callback then received an offer. Callbacks were based on grades since that's all you can really gleam from a screener. I know people with excellent resume credentials who had 3Hs and were dinged. I know K-JDs with 6Hs who received callbacks. I don't know of anyone who received an offer with fewer than ~5Hs. This pattern is frequently confirmed at HLS among everyone I talked to. Thus, S&C offers were almost assuredly based solely on grades for at least those two years.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Grades have little, if any connection with personality. Thus, S&C's selection process for those two years almost assuredly had little, if any connection with personality. I doubt the process has changed at all at HLS, and I imagine the same process is used at other schools.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- skers
- Posts: 5230
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
It's completely true though. S&C's pattern is pretty much auto-callback->offer w/ same day offers.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Weird to make that a distinguishing feature from Paul, Weiss though since they also have a really high callback offer ratio.
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Can't imagine there's much of a difference re: the quality of the two practices, but I do corporate so don't really know.
S&C is awful. I remember sitting in their corner waiting room during my callback watching all the helicopters go by, etc. Not gonna lie, it got my panties pretty wet. Then I realized I was around a bunch of aspie nutjobs and chose a diff. firm.
Turns out the new firm was full of a bunch of aspie nutjobs too; they were just slightly better at covering it up. Who knows...you really can't win in this fucking job. YMMV.
S&C is awful. I remember sitting in their corner waiting room during my callback watching all the helicopters go by, etc. Not gonna lie, it got my panties pretty wet. Then I realized I was around a bunch of aspie nutjobs and chose a diff. firm.
Turns out the new firm was full of a bunch of aspie nutjobs too; they were just slightly better at covering it up. Who knows...you really can't win in this fucking job. YMMV.
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
for what it's worth, PW's new corporate partner is worse than any S&C partner
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
top 10% at CCN who did not get a S&C callback...skers wrote:It's completely true though. S&C's pattern is pretty much auto-callback->offer w/ same day offers.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Weird to make that a distinguishing feature from Paul, Weiss though since they also have a really high callback offer ratio.
must be the aspiest of the aspies
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Did u wet ur pants?Anonymous User wrote:top 10% at CCN who did not get a S&C callback...skers wrote:It's completely true though. S&C's pattern is pretty much auto-callback->offer w/ same day offers.Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Weird to make that a distinguishing feature from Paul, Weiss though since they also have a really high callback offer ratio.
must be the aspiest of the aspies
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:03 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Definitely not written by somebody about to summer at S&CAnonymous User wrote:I have to say, I don't get this "screening for personality" idea at all. I don't think it can actually be done, especially in a 20-30 minute interview with stock questions and stock responses. You bet that I tried to affect, whatever that means, a "fratty" demeanor for Latham, Kirkland, etc. But it's really hard to show how fratty you are when answering questions about my 1L summer. Law students will do what it takes to get a job.
Even if one could determine an interviewee's personality in a short interview, how do we know that affected personality is actually the interviewee's actual personality?
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
TBH the S&C personality shit show schtick is probably way overblown. The type of person that ends up there is on average probably similar to the one who ends up at any major player in the NY market including Paul Weiss. If I were making this decision it would basically come down to location preference and whether I valued the top tier corporate practice under the same roof at S&C more than the marginally better lit reputation PW has. Either is defensible.
E- To be fair though I'm tainted by the fact that their recruiting at UChi is indistinguishable from any other NY V20 (i.e. it's as much personality as a resume drop)
E- To be fair though I'm tainted by the fact that their recruiting at UChi is indistinguishable from any other NY V20 (i.e. it's as much personality as a resume drop)
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
I mean, there is so much variation and subjectivity it's hard to know what to believe about any particular firm's "culture" but S&C is one of those places that seems to have an almost universally negative connotation from people who have dealt with them. It's all kind of vague but at some point it starts to feel significant. And this isn't about the "personality" of the associates so much as the kind of attitudes that prevail among the partnership.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
Is their name on here? http://www.paulweiss.com/practices/tran ... x?id=19080Anonymous User wrote:for what it's worth, PW's new corporate partner is worse than any S&C partner
-
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 3:03 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
That anon is probably talking about their new shiny lateral from K&E
-
- Posts: 432605
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
minnbills wrote:(outed as S&C aspie)Anonymous User wrote:Lacepiece23 wrote:Only a 3L, but from everything I've heard is S&C for corporate PW for Lit. S&C also has a culture of selecting only the top students irrespective of personality, which for me would be a huge turn off. I'd go PW. But I really am not basing this off much.
Ah, the myth that never dies. I've never understood why folks assume that because S&C does its big cull at the screener stage rather than the callback stage, it doesn't select for personality.
(Which is not to say that S&C doesn't weigh grades more than its peer firms, because my understanding is that it does, but it's a giant leap from (x) weighing grades more heavily to (y) "irrespective of personality".)
Duh.
What I've heard - and this is second and third hand, not from the horse's mouth, so make of it what you will - is that S&C cares about personality to ensure that you're above a threshold. I.e, there's not this notion that the cooler you are, the better a lawyer you'll be. Rather, you need to have some minimum level of social skills, and above that there are lots of ways to skin the cat - some folks are client-charming salesmen, some are legal ninjas with barebones client management skills, and everywhere in between. (Even at other firms, I think a quick glance around any partnership reveals that sociability only weakly correlates, at best, with long term professional success.)
Testing for that level of social skills generally can be done at a screener, and in the rare case that the screening folks miss a horrendous jerk, well, that's the rare callback that doesn't lead to an offer. So instead of testing whether you're a Cool Girl or a Sweet Dude or a Hipster or whatever, none of which has much bearing on your ability to do legal work, callbacks are viewed as a chance to recruit candidates that have already passed a grade threshold and seem to have the minimum social skills necessary to have a chance to succeed professionally.
I do think that S&C's obvious efforts to keep doors open to top candidates from lower-ranked schools and/or nontraditional backgrounds is closely related to this. If you're assessing candidates based on how much you'd want to go have drinks with them on Friday night, then you're going to ding people from backgrounds that differ from yours. Some of the best associates I've worked with are folks I'd never hang with socially, but they are responsible, collaborative, and smart as hell.
Finally, as with all firms, different practice groups have different cultures. Some groups tend to be quiet and keep to themselves, some groups are gregarious and social, and some groups are a mix. It would be crappy - and unfair - for me to ding the fratty loud guy just because I'm personally quiet and reserved and work with quiet, reserved folks if there's a bunch of loud, back-slapping lawyers upstairs who would love to work with him.
- utahraptor
- Posts: 3439
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:05 pm
Re: Sullivan & Cromwell v. Paul Weiss
this is some really dumb kool-aid drinking
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login