Top Law Schools

District court clerk here with an offer to go to Skadden DC. I was curious to get TLS' thoughts on the DC office. Specifically:

(1) How well-regarded is the DC office compared to the big DC players like Covington and Hogan?

(2) How walled are the practice groups? I.e., if I am in a big group (say, litigation), what are the odds I can pick up some work in a small group (political law, CFIUS, etc.). Is it ever possible to move groups?

Anonymous User wrote:District court clerk here with an offer to go to Skadden DC. I was curious to get TLS' thoughts on the DC office. Specifically:

(1) How well-regarded is the DC office compared to the big DC players like Covington and Hogan?

Whose "regard" are you concerned about?

Skadden is a big law firm with big law clients. You'll work a lot for partners who make a lot of money. The same is true of Covington and Hogan.

Anyone else?

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:District court clerk here with an offer to go to Skadden DC. I was curious to get TLS' thoughts on the DC office. Specifically:

(1) How well-regarded is the DC office compared to the big DC players like Covington and Hogan?

Whose "regard" are you concerned about?

Skadden is a big law firm with big law clients. You'll work a lot for partners who make a lot of money. The same is true of Covington and Hogan.

Sorry to say, but this advice kinda sucks. Damn near all big firms have some DC output, but most of them sorta suck. Skadden DC is not one of the ones that suck. It's pretty good for general and misc. lit stuff I think.

Desert Fox wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:District court clerk here with an offer to go to Skadden DC. I was curious to get TLS' thoughts on the DC office. Specifically:

(1) How well-regarded is the DC office compared to the big DC players like Covington and Hogan?

Whose "regard" are you concerned about?

Skadden is a big law firm with big law clients. You'll work a lot for partners who make a lot of money. The same is true of Covington and Hogan.

Sorry to say, but this advice kinda sucks. Damn near all big firms have some DC output, but most of them sorta suck. Skadden DC is not one of the ones that suck. It's pretty good for general and misc. lit stuff I think.

I wasn't offering advice--just wondering what the OP actually wanted. But lol@your suggestion that Skadden sucks less for an associate than Covington and Hogan. (Yeah, I know you work in DC big law, but seriously?)

rpupkin wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:District court clerk here with an offer to go to Skadden DC. I was curious to get TLS' thoughts on the DC office. Specifically:

(1) How well-regarded is the DC office compared to the big DC players like Covington and Hogan?

Whose "regard" are you concerned about?

Skadden is a big law firm with big law clients. You'll work a lot for partners who make a lot of money. The same is true of Covington and Hogan.

Sorry to say, but this advice kinda sucks. Damn near all big firms have some DC output, but most of them sorta suck. Skadden DC is not one of the ones that suck. It's pretty good for general and misc. lit stuff I think.

I wasn't offering advice--just wondering what the OP actually wanted. But lol@your suggestion that Skadden sucks less than Covington and Hogan for an associate. (Yeah, I know you work in DC big law, but seriously?)

I thought they were asking how "good" the firms are, not quality of live. QOL wise -LOL. Skadden is probably worse, but at least, no better.

Desert Fox wrote:I thought they were asking how "good" the firms are, not quality of live. QOL wise -LOL. Skadden is probably worse, but at least, no better.

I think Skadden is fine, but I don't think its general lit practice in DC is appreciably better than the other two firms the OP mentioned. But my knowledge is limited to just a few practice areas, so perhaps you're right.

rpupkin wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:I thought they were asking how "good" the firms are, not quality of live. QOL wise -LOL. Skadden is probably worse, but at least, no better.

I think Skadden is fine, but I don't think its general lit practice in DC is appreciably better than the other two firms the OP mentioned. But my knowledge is limited to just a few practice areas, so perhaps you're right.

It's not better, it's just not shitty. I'd say nearly as good, but it's all fucking guesswork.

Desert Fox wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:I thought they were asking how "good" the firms are, not quality of live. QOL wise -LOL. Skadden is probably worse, but at least, no better.

I think Skadden is fine, but I don't think its general lit practice in DC is appreciably better than the other two firms the OP mentioned. But my knowledge is limited to just a few practice areas, so perhaps you're right.

It's not better, it's just not shitty. I'd say nearly as good, but it's all fucking guesswork.

Totally agree. Which is why I'm perplexed that you took issue with the observation that these are all big law firms will big law clients--there's nothing really to distinguish them in the abstract.

rpupkin wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:I thought they were asking how "good" the firms are, not quality of live. QOL wise -LOL. Skadden is probably worse, but at least, no better.

I think Skadden is fine, but I don't think its general lit practice in DC is appreciably better than the other two firms the OP mentioned. But my knowledge is limited to just a few practice areas, so perhaps you're right.

It's not better, it's just not shitty. I'd say nearly as good, but it's all fucking guesswork.

Totally agree. Which is why I'm perplexed that you took issue with the observation that these are all big law firms will big law clients--there's nothing really to distinguish them in the abstract.

Only because there are big law firms here with big law clients that are still just 30 attorney outposts for the NYC office and I think that sort of sucks. Maybe its easier though,not sure.

Desert Fox wrote:

rpupkin wrote: Totally agree. Which is why I'm perplexed that you took issue with the observation that these are all big law firms will big law clients--there's nothing really to distinguish them in the abstract.

Only because there are big law firms here with big law clients that are still just 30 attorney outposts for the NYC office and I think that sort of sucks. Maybe its easier though,not sure.

Ah, I get it. Yeah, I agree about the small-outpost thing. But of course Skadden isn't an example of that. Its DC Office is big and they have a lot of strong partners there. If the OP was asking about Convington vs. Hogan vs. Davis Polk, then what you're talking about matters.

Are you planning on being a major rain-maker or managing partner? That's the only situation in the present case where I think the centrality of the office you start at would matter for your legal career (2L here, so y'know, take that with the appropriately-sized grain of salt). Hogan and Covington are big hitters in DC, but it's not like Skadden has a small presence here either.

I hear Hogan is a little more walled than most firms, but no idea how this compares to Skadden or Covington (given the latter's penchant for formality, perhaps the same is true here as well? Totally baseless conjecture)

DF Thread